Subject: Re: [boost] Formal Review: Boost.RangeEx
From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-25 16:11:28
Vicente Botet skrev:
>> Dear Giovanni,
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Giovanni Piero Deretta <gpderetta_at_[hidden]
>> Yes, I think I might have over-emphasised the difference. Would you prefer
>> the function overload to be in the boost::adaptors namespace, the boost
>> namespace or something else?
>>>> I had considered
>>>> creating a range adaptor to be highly different to applying an algorithm,
>>>> perhaps I over-emphasised this distinction when making the decision.
>>> FWIW, I have code like this:
>>> total = ( r | filter(_r, f) | map(_r, m) | accumulate(_r, zero, a) );
>>> i.e. I don't have a strong distinction between adaptor and algorithms.
>> Yes, I'm sold!
> I agree, the introduction of the parameter (_r) makes the library homogeneus. An adaptor is a functor with a placeholder for the input parameter.
I my examples I removed the _r from the syntax. I don't see the point in
having them, if the code can work without them. Are they really needed?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk