Re: [boost] De Bruijn Bind (alternate bind syntax) Interest?

Subject: Re: [boost] De Bruijn Bind (alternate bind syntax) Interest?
From: Stefan Strasser (strasser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-03 07:50:10

> david, why do you need to number the lambdas? doesn't the "nested   
> index" of the args refer to the level of nesting instead of the  
> number  given to the lam<> template?

after reading the link larry posted (1), let me correct my question:
does lam need to know the number of parameters of the resulting function?

Boost.Bind simply ignores additional arguments, and generates a  
compiler error for insufficient arguments.

void f(int,int);
bind(&f,3,_1)(1,2); // -> f(3,1)

(1) http://bitbucket.org/camior/de-bruijn-bind/src#cl-45