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

From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-18 11:01:56

"Martin Bonner" <martin.bonner_at_[hidden]> wrote

> This is going to get messy as you say with templates (which would FORCE a
> space in).
>
>>    if (any_of(...) ^some_predicate()^ 5)... // 3
>>
>>    if (any_of(...) /some_predicate()/ 5)... // 4
> These two are visually too light-weight for my taste.
>
> Why not:
>    if (any_of(...) *some_predicate()* 5)...
> or
>    if (any_of(...) %some_predicate()% 5)...

IMO this argument boils down to whether  C++  will be getting user-definable
operators ( IOW using a name as an operator).
If  user-definable operators are not likely to become part of the languge, then
it seems to me to be  unproductive to pursue the above,  when a function call
syntax will work just as well.
Alternatively, if user-definable operators are likely to become part of C++,
then its most  closely representable using a macro:

if ( any_of(...)   BOOST_OPERATOR(some_predicate)   5  )...

For simplicity the precedence should be as high as possible( as close as
possible to function-call).

FWIW the argument on comp.std.c++  regarding user definable operators seems to
be mostly against.

regards
Andy Little