[boost] Re: Overload resolution & boost::bind

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-18 11:08:27

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I don't buy the ideas that involve using function types as in
>
>   select_overload<int(int)>
>
> because it requires specifying the return type, which is irrelevant.

Current pratice is to speficy the entire signature, including the
(irrelevant) return type and the (redundant) class name. Arturo's
suggestion gets rid of the return type and class name, but introduces
the (irrelevant) arity. Using function types eliminates the class name
but keeps the return type. So neither is quite right, althought I tend
to prefer using function types.

The essential information that needs to be supplied is just a
typelist. So one could use

    whatever_cast< mpl::list<char> >(&P::f)

but this would not make the significance of the typelist clear. So it
might be natural to replace this with

   whatever_cast< arg_types<char> >(&P::f)

or

   whatever_cast< arg_types(char) >(&P::f)

Jonathan