[boost] Re: result_ofOp, operator should be a template parameter

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-05 18:43:18

Doug Gregor <dgregor_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Jul 5, 2004, at 3:00 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>> Doug Gregor wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 3, 2004, at 4:38 AM, Andy Little wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> An example that I think demonstrates the superiority of this:
>>>>>
>>>>>         binary_operation<A,Op,B>::result_type result;
>>>>>
>>>>> over this:
>>>>>
>>>>>     result_of_plus<A, B>::type result;
>>>>>
>>>>> in this directory:
>>>> In Boost CVS there is an implementation of result_of, which would be
>>>> used like this:
>>>>     result_of<Op(A, B)>::type
>>>
>>> I think this is the best interface I've seen so far. The
>>> result_of_plus
>>> is just a temporary solution while waiting for Doug's result_of work
>>> which was not available at the time.
>>
>> ...which is just a temporary solution while we wait for decltype?
>
> Absolutely. But it's a solution we can use to make C++98/C++0x
> portable libraries. At least, that's the idea
> :)

Why don't we implement it for compilers that support some kind of
typeof, and then get Arkadiy Vertlyjb's (sp?) typeof library going?

Then we can slap a more-portable interface on it and start using it
all over Boost ;-)

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com