Subject: Re: [boost] [bind][phoenix] unified placeholders, yea or nay?
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-27 21:03:46
On 5/27/2012 7:22 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
> I'm considering taking on as a side project the unification of the bind
> and phoenix placeholders, a perennial source of confusion and annoyance.
Is there not also a problem with boost::lambda using _n placeholders ?
Or is this a non-problem because the end-user is expected to use either
boost::lambda or boost::phoenix, but never both at the same time, since
the latter is supposed to supercede the former ?
I have always felt that none of these placeholders should have been
lifted into the global namespace by default. An end-user can always do
this for himself if he desires and then the often reported conflict with
these placeholders is solved by not moving more than one of them into
the global namespace.
As for unification of these placeholders, if it can be done and made
interoperable I think it is a worthy thing to do.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk