Re: [boost] boost::function feature request?

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-04 13:22:00

Peter Dimov writes:
> When using boost::function<bool()> to implement event callbacks such as 
> is_visible or is_enabled, it's very convenient to pass 'true' or 'false' 
> directly, instead of going through bind( identity<bool>(), true ). An UI 
> button I recently did even had separate bool properties in addition to the 
> callback events for these reasons.
> 
> I wonder whether it's reasonable to add
> 
>     this_type& operator=( T const & t );
> 
> to function<T()> that does the obvious thing.
> 
> Of course f = t; is merely a shorthand way of spelling f = 
> boost::lambda::constant(t), but a dependency on lambda isn't always 
> desirable.
> 
> Thoughts?

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/76774 
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/76778
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/76784

I ended up with 'f = always( whatever )', which grew on me to the point 
that I don't wish for the above anymore. FWIW.

--
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering