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

Subject: Re: [boost] De Bruijn Bind (alternate bind syntax) Interest?
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-04 02:09:18

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:09, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Can someone explain to me, in English, what this technique allows me
> to express that I couldn't otherwise?
>
> Is this just about allowing generic composition of lambdas?
>

It feels like it to me.

What I've understood so far is that _0_n and _n are essentially the
same, but that _0_n requires a lambda to scope them explicitly (sortof
like protect).

The advantage of _y_n is then that you can refer to the _ns in
enclosing lambdas (aka outside of y protects).

Am I on the right track, David?

Thanks,
~ Scott