Subject: Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03
From: Thomas Heller (thom.heller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-24 23:56:59
On 11/24/2011 10:55 PM, Nathan Ridge wrote:
>> From: thom.heller_at_[hidden]
>> On 11/24/2011 10:38 PM, Nathan Ridge wrote:
>>> The key word here being "approximation". Boost.Local is an approximation,
>>> too, just in a different way. Boost.Local gives you something Phoenix etc.
>>> do not (C++ statement syntax), and Phoenix etc. give you something
>>> Boost.Local does not (in-line definition in an expression context).
>>> Both approximations are useful, and some may prefer one over the other.
>> That's just plain wrong. In case you missed it:
> Huh? Those are out-of-line, non-local function definitions...
> Am I missing something?
> That's a neat idea, but I'm not sure how it's relevant to this discussion.
> Those who are objecting to Boost.Local are not objecting on the basis that
> the generated function object is not a Phoenix function...
You are of course right, the first two links are not about local
function definitions. However, the third link proposes a solution that
should bring everyone together: Local functions combined with the power
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk