Re: [boost] [fusion][parameter] a solution for named parameters /parameter packs using fusion maps

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-13 11:09:30

>-----Original Message-----
>From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
>[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Stjepan Rajko
>Sent: 13 August 2008 14:59
>To: boost_at_[hidden]
>Subject: [boost] [fusion][parameter] a solution for named 
>parameters /parameter packs using fusion maps

>I just realized that named parameters can be implemented rather nicely
>using fusion maps (I'm not sure whether this has been explored
>before).  I threw together an implementation for two particular
>parameters/names, but the method could be easily generalized.  Here
>are examples of functions taking parameter packs 

<snip>

This looks neat and feels C++-ish (rather than IBM JCL - but you're too young to remember that ;-)

Jake Voytko and I concluded similarly when developing Scale Vector Graphics PLotting user interface where there are hundreds of
possible functions (x_axis_color(red), point_color(green)...).

(Watch this space for a enhanced and possibly useable version).

Chaining calls is convenient because you don't need to remember the order.
The compile time seemed a little better too compared to Boost.Parameter, and the setup more intuitive (C++y rather than macros).

Since it now clear that named parameters are not going to in the C++ language proper, I believe that this is best idiom to use.
Despite being unfamiliar, chaining is obvious once you get going with it.

Paul

---
Paul A Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
[phone] & SMS, Mobile [phone] & SMS
pbristow_at_[hidden]