Subject: Re: [boost] Phoenix3 port to proto complete
From: Giovanni Piero Deretta (gpderetta_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-23 11:18:30
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Thomas Heller
> On Friday 23 July 2010 15:59:46 Robert Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Thomas Heller
>> > Ladies and Gentlemen,
>> > I proudly announce that the port of phoenix3 is completed! All
>> > testcases pass! (some with minor modifications)
> With Boost.Proto we have the unique possibilty to (more or less) easily
> introspect our pheonix expression and do lots of cool stuff with it.
Is Phoenix finally compatible with result_of instead of using its own protocol?
> Boost.Bind - The competitor of phoenix::bind:
> Boost.Bind exists for a long time now. phoenix::bind shall be completely
> compatible to Boost.Bind (API wise).
> However it shall not replace Boost.Bind, because Boost.Bind has some
> advantages over phoenix::bind (compile time, legacy compiler support).
but phoenix::bind is polymorphic like std::bind, while boost::bind is
still monomorphic, right?
> Boost.Lambda - The predecessor of Boost.Phoenix:
> Boost.Lambda is the one library which inspired to Joel de Guzman to build
> Phoenix in the first place. It shares many similarities, but phoenix is built
> upon more modern concepts.
> IIUC, the plan was to deprecate Boost.Lambda at some point in favor of
> Some needs to clarify this a bit more.
As far as I remember from the review, it was decided that Phoenix
would just replace boost.lambda (except that boost.lambda would be
kept for backward compatibility for some releases); keeping
compatibility with the Lambda api was hard and just not worth it.
> C++0x lambdas - The competitor of Boost.Phoenix:
as long as C++0x lambdas stay monomorphic, there is really no competition :D.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk