From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-12 19:56:41
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Is it really true that I can write
>> bind(f, _1) > _2
>> but can't write
>> _1 > _2
>> I can't imagine a good reason for that restriction, but I don't see
>> any indication that the latter is supported in the docs.
> A limitation of the current implementation. On some compilers, the
> placeholders are function pointers and _1 > _2 can't be
> overloaded. There's no other technical reason that prevents _1 > _2
> (or _1 > 0) from working; it'd fall out of the specification.
Thanks for the info.
What abut the trick of making the placeholders references in an
unnamed namespace to objects in a named one?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk