Subject: Re: [boost] [GSoC][Phoenix3] Regarding mutability of arguments passed to phoenix expressions
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-06-12 15:39:22
At Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:07:04 -0400,
Eric Niebler wrote:
> On 6/12/2010 2:04 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
> > At Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:36:56 -0400, Eric Niebler wrote:
> >> On 6/11/2010 12:27 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
> >>> I would be cautious about emulating C++0x lambdas. I'm not sure yet
> >>> that they don't suck.
> >> They suck, but not for this reason. ;-)
> > I don't know. The more I learn about the capture rules, suckier they
> > seem.
> Ha! :-) I've seen your msgs on the std- reflector. Don't worry, Phoenix
> captures everything consistently, regardless of whether it's a local
> variable or a member variable. It can't do otherwise.
I know. I'm beginning to think that if we could only (appropriately)
change the rules for overriding -> and add (an appropriate) operator.,
Phoenix would be the indisputable hands-down winner.
As it is, IMO it's still going to be better than the built-in lambdas.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk