From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-15 17:19:42
Tobias Schwinger wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>> Tobias Schwinger wrote:
>>> Peter Dimov wrote:
>>>> Why is there a need to detect a default constructor?
>>> (I probably snipped away too much context...)
>>> A generic function object that constructs an arbitrary type would have
>>> to know (unless having variadic templates, or being able to define
>>> operator() as a nonmember function template).
>> Umm. Why?
> OK, in the bind case nullary operator() can just be omitted (if there
> are no parameters there's no point to use bind in the first place).
> But for the Fusion sequence case that wrapper would have to be entirely
> generic (IOW allow nullary calls if there is an appropriate
> constructor), because the sequence can be empty.
No. I just noticed it just works fine without - sorry for the noise.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk