Re: [boost] Rave for proposed Boost.Local (functions)

Subject: Re: [boost] Rave for proposed Boost.Local (functions)
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-06 23:15:29

On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr.
<jhellrung_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 2/6/2011 5:46 PM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr.
>> <jhellrung_at_[hidden]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2/6/2011 9:17 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> I am posting here the code generated by the macros which might help
>>>> curious readers in spotting costly operations performed by Boost.Local
>>>> (if there are any). This of course does not include the preprocessing
>>>> time. (I hope it's not too much code... just try to get passed the
>>>> typeof noise at the beginning...)
>>>
>>> Is the use of Boost.Typeof optional?  I.e., can I just provide the types
>>> of
>>> the arguments and bound variables myself?
>>
>> No but I think you can simply use a normal (not bound) local function
>> parameters to do this:
>
> [...]
>
> So Boost.Typeof is necessary to bind variables...?

Yes. Boost.Typeof is only used to automatically deduce the type of the
bound variables. I will double check that if you bind no variable then
no typeof code is generated by the macros.

-- 
Lorenzo