From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-06 12:52:11
On Jan 6, 2007, at 9:54 AM, Peter Dimov wrote:
> Yuval Ronen wrote:
>> Wouldn't the result_of library be completely useless once typeof and
>> other stuff like that be introduced into the language? Is the
>> result_of library just a temporary patch accepted to tr1 only until
> It would be nice if the answers to these questions turn out to be
> yes and
> yes, in no particular order. But there are indications that
> decltype won't
> be quite what it needs to be in order to render result_of useless.
> have to wait and see.
The intent was "yes" and "yes", but in the end we found that
result_of still has some notational advantages over decltype in many
cases. If anything is going to make result_of useless, it would be
the introduction of the "Callable" concept, which gives the same
information in addition to type-safety guarantees.
If decltype does not end up with the right semantics to make
implementing result_of trivial, I suspect it will be over the dead
bodies of the majority of the Library Working Group. The reason we
have "decltype" and not "typeof" is because someone wanted typeof to
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk