From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-16 19:09:50
Larry Evans wrote:
> There was also an issue with separation of transforms from grammars.
> This mixing made it hard for me to understand transforms. I believe
> separating the two would make understanding for other novice users
> easier also. Of course I'm not even real sure that separation is
> possible, as I intimated with the '*highly* speculative' qualifier
> in my review. However, since then I've been trying to separate the
> two. This lead me to understand *maybe* why bundling the two is
> necessary. The pass_through transform docs contain:
> , boost::result_of
> < Grammar::proto_childN(Expr::proto_childN, State, Data)
> Now if Grammar::proto_childN is *not* derived from pass_through,
> then that would make the above an object CTOR call.
No, you are confusing how boost::result_of and proto::when interpret
function types. result_of has a protocol, documented in TR1, for
calculating the return type of a function or function object given a
function type as above. proto::when has a different convention, which
doesn't come into play here.
> the N-th child has a 3 element CTOR, then this will fail to
> compile. OTOH, if then N-th child is derived from pass_through
> (IOW, if the grammar and transform are bundled), then this
> will compile.
> Eric, is that about right?
-- Eric Niebler 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