Subject: Re: [boost] Phoenix review
From: Giovanni Piero Deretta (gpderetta_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-25 08:54:55
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Doug Gregor <dgregor_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Is "lambda" equivalent to BLL's "unlambda" or "protect"?
as far as I can tell no, because boost::lambda::protect(f) is
basically the identity, except that it changes the type of 'f', hiding
OTOH phoenix::lambda[f] returns a stub that in turns returns 'f' (I
didn't check if the type of 'f' is changed). The phoenix machinery
makes sure that when used as a nested lambda expression, lambda
actually work more or less like protect. The abstraction break if you
use lambda as top level.
For more on this topic, see my comments about phoenix on another mail.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk