Re: [boost] Interest for a perl6-like-junctions-class?

From: FlSt_at_[hidden]
Date: 2005-08-03 14:47:48

David Abrahams wrote:

>Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>  
>
>>From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
>>    
>>
>>>Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Florian's notion of these operators, derived from Perl, is that
>>>>they are not symmetrical.  To make expressions like 1 and 2
>>>>symmetrical, I've taken to swapping arguments depending upon the
>>>>combination of types, which means I'm forcing the symmetry.
>>>>Maybe I'm just off the mark and they should be allowed to be
>>>>asymmetrical.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>I think that's right.  These things reflect the syntax and semantics
>>>of english, not of math anymore.
>>>      
>>>
>>That's always a bad sign! ;-)
>>    
>>
>
>Not when english expresses what we mean more concisely.
>  
>
I think that a clean mathematical definition of a topic like this would 
be a good idea.
Furthermore I uploaded a new implementation of my junctions calss to the 
sanbox file vault junction/boost_junction_v8.zip and a draft of a 
document which describes the junctions from a mathematical view. (It's 
just a draft and the notation needs to be explained)
Lambda is removed from the current version, because to many compilers 
don't compile this. I'm using boost::bind instead to change the operands 
order.

Sincerly
  Florian

Sincerly
  Florian