Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-12 10:40:16

Daniel Wallin <dalwan01_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Daniel Wallin <dalwan01_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>David Abrahams wrote:
>>>>Daniel Wallin <dalwan01_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>>>I have been toying with a more general solution to this problem, where
>>>>>one can do things like:
>>>>> check_dereference<T, is_convertible<mpl::_, U&> >
>>>>> check_add<T, T, is_convertible<mpl::_, T> >
>>>>> etc.
>>>>That *might* be impressive if I could tell what those expressions
>>>>supposed to mean ;-)
>>> The metafunction class
>> I don't see a metafunction class here. Don't you mean "lambda
>> expression?"
> Maybe. I was trying to describe the formal argument. So I guess
> something like:
> template<class T, class U, class Predicate>
> struct check_add;
> Where Predicate is a unary metafunction class or a lambda
> expression.
> ??

The new definition of "lambda expression" is:

    a metafunction class -or- a placeholder expression

so, you can just say "unary lambda expression."

> [snip]
>> Oh, very nice! Now it's impressive. :-)
> :) So, anyone interested in this?

Yeah, sure, I'm interested. I still hope whoever's doing this won't
overlook free functions like swap ;-).

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at