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

Subject: Re: [boost] De Bruijn Bind (alternate bind syntax) Interest?
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-03 19:35:05

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:17 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 2. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong about this, but it looks like
>> for "ordinary lambdas" (those that don't need protect), the
>> corresponding bind expressions are always shorter and simpler.
>
> Again, if built on Boost.Phoenix, could it not be just like this as
> some examples?
>
>  using namespace boost::phoenix;
>
>  bind(f, _1, 314)(42);
>
>  bind(f, bind(g, _2_1), _1_1)(42);
>
> And whatever else...

I'm sorry, but I don't understand how your question relates to the
text you quoted.  Actually, I can't parse the question either :-)

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com