Subject: Re: [boost] phoenix::bind
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-02 18:37:09
Steven Watanabe wrote:
> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>> Yep, I'm keeping the behavior of protect, not unlambda. As
>> I mentioned in my other post. val(_1 < _2) can probably be
>> the unlambda behavior.
> I don't think it's a good idea to overload val like this, giving it
> two different unrelated meanings.
I think you're probably right. For example, I use:
to convert the referene into a val. So, agreed. It does not make
sense to overload the meaning of val.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk