[boost] Re: indirecter_unary, indirecter_binary

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 17:59:45

"Fredrik Blomqvist" <fredrik_blomqvist_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:u1xar33ps.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
>>
>>> template< class Fun >
>>> struct indirect_fun
>>> {
>>>    indirect_fun( Fun f ) : fun(f)
>>>    { }
>>>
>>>    template< class T >
>>>    typename
>>>       result_of<Fun(typename pointee<T>::type)>::type
>>>    operator()( T const& r ) const
>>>    { return fun( *r ); }
>>
>> yeah, this is good stuff, mind if I borrow it?
>>
> Wouldn't it be a good thing to use the full result_of "protocol" as
> specified in the docs (and more specifically in the N1454) ?

Namely what?  Am I missing some cv qualification and references?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com