Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Rave for proposed Boost.Local (functions)
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-05 11:47:36

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Gregory Crosswhite
<gcross_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hey everyone,
> The purpose of this e-mail is to rave about Lorenzo's proposed Boost.Local
> library in the hopes of inspiring people to start the review process for it.
>  :-)
> I have been experimenting with using this library in my own code, and it has
> been a godsend for me.  In one of the projects I have been working on I ran

I'm glad my library is helping :)

> At first I thought that the interface needed to use it was ugly, but as I
> have gotten used to it I have changed my mind.  Part of why I thought it was

Other people (but not Boosters) have made a similar comment about the
"parenthesized syntax". It's (very) strange at first but it's not bad
at all after the 1st week of using it.

> ugly was because of the way that whitespace was used in the example included
> in the original e-mail:
>        (void) (add)( (double)(num) (const bind)((factor))  (bind)((&sum))  )
>        ) {
>            sum += factor * num;
>            std::clog<<  "Summed: "<<  sum<<  std::endl;
>        add(100.0);

I personally use this version when the parameters can fit in a single
line and...

> To my mind this example looks a lot clearer if you reformat it as follows:
>            (void) (add)(
>                (double)(num)
>                (const bind)((factor))
>                (bind)((&sum))
>            )
>        ) {
>            sum += factor * num;
>            std::clog<<  "Summed: "<<  sum<<  std::endl;
>        add(100.0);

... this other version when the parameters are too long to fit in one
line. Programmers can use the white spaces as they wish (as white
spaces do not matter in the parenthesized syntax). I am happy to
rework all the library examples to comply with the white space
formatting that Boosters find most readable by default.

Hello all,

Sorry for the late reply (and many thanks to Pierre for letting me
know that Boost.Local discussions resumed).

I will reply to all your comments separately in a few emails that will
follow shortly. I hope my replies do not appear too disorganized given
that I haven't been able to send them in real-time. (I also have to
review the Boost.Phoenix vs. Boost.Local email thread...)

Thanks in advance for all you comments on Boost.Local!


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at