Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Case study: Boost.Local versus Boost.Phoenix
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-05 15:28:26

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Joel de Guzman
<joel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 2/4/2011 12:29 PM, Gregory Crosswhite wrote:
>> Local should be viewed as being complimentary to Phoenix rather competing
>> with it, and it
>> should be evaluated on its own merits.
> I think I have to agree with this. In as much as we have Boost-FOREACH
> in addition to std::for_each, Boost.Local is a good and useful library
> that is simple, practical and effective enough as it is.

I also honestly think that Boost.Local and Boost.Phoenix cover
different application domains.

I can spell that out in the library docs if Boosters come to the same
conclusion. I compared Boost.Local with Boost.Phoenix just because
they can both be used to write functor objects (like many other
libraries can) but I would chose to use one over the other depending
on the my specific application needs (e.g., can I accept a non normal
C++ syntax for the body? do I need the extra functional programming
power offered by Phoenix? etc).


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