From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-03 19:23:54
On 03/03/08 15:51, Eric Niebler wrote:
> Larry Evans wrote:
>> On 03/03/08 00:21, Eric Niebler wrote:
>> > Larry Evans wrote:
>> >> If the template arguments are grammars then
>> >> not an expression type.
>> > Correct, it's a grammar type.
>> >> AFAICT, it's of no use.
>> > That's not true. The fact that shift_right<L,R>::type creates
>> > expressions when L and R are expressions, and grammars when L and
>> > grammars,
>> Are you saying shift_right<L,R>::type is a grammar when L and R are
> Yes! :-)
Ah! Not what I expected. The fog around my brain is thickening :(
>> or did you mean shift_right<L,R> is a grammar when L and R
>> are grammars?
> That is also true. This is a short-hand, provided for convenience.
> shift_right<L,R>::type is *very* simple. It is expr<tag::shift_right,
> args2<L, R> >. Always.
Unexpected again. I jumped to the conclusion that expr was for
expressions, not grammars. So then is shift_right<L,R>::type, when L
and R are grammars, the same as shift_right<L,R>?
> It's just a 2-element container and a tag. If L
> and R are expressions, it is an expression. If they're grammars, it is a
> grammar, suitable for use as the second template parameter to
> proto::matches. It is simple, IMO, and leads to a very straightforward
> implementation of proto::matches<>. See, for instance, how the behavior
> of proto::matches<> is specified in terms of expr<> instantiations:
Ah ha! The fog begins to lift. I should have read that. I
apologize. Maybe if near the beginning of the documentation the
concepts of expressions, grammars, and transforms were introduced, and
then mention that a grammar was a type of expression... or at least
was formed with the same template as an expression... Hmm.. Getting
confused again. How can one distinguish a grammar from an expression
if both are formed from the same template, i.e. the expr template?
Maybe by starting from the base case, the terminal template?
IOW, is the following:
For any type T:
terminal<T> is a grammar type.
terminal<T>::type is an expression type.
If T0,T1,...,Tn are all grammar types, and Tag is an n-ary tag,
then expr<Tag,T0,T2,...,Tn> is a grammar type.
If T0,T1,...,Tn are all expression types, and Tag is an n-ary tag,
then expr<Tag,T0,T,...,Tn> is an expression type.
Otherwise, expr<Tag,T0,T1,...,Tn> is meaningless
a correct description of how to distinguish a grammar type from an
> What I can agree with is the following: the documentation currently
> doesn't say what right_shift<L,R>::type means when L and R are grammars.
> That is an oversight, and I'll fix it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk