Re: [boost] [bind][phoenix] unified placeholders, yea or nay?

Subject: Re: [boost] [bind][phoenix] unified placeholders, yea or nay?
From: lcaminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-27 23:26:35

Eric Niebler-3 wrote
> 
> On 5/27/2012 4:35 PM, lcaminiti wrote:
>> Would it also complicate Bind compile-time errors?
> 
> I don't believe it should.
> 
>>> At this point, it's not obvious to me that the benefits outweigh the
>>> costs. Opinions? Peter, I'd especially like to hear your thoughts.
>>>
>> 
>> What are the benefits of the unification?
> 
> No more ambiguity errors. Phoenix and bind would share placeholders.
> 

This seems useful to me (especially if it does not come to the price of more
complex Bind compiler errors). 

However, would the ambiguity also be resolved by moving Bind's placeholders
out of the global namespace and have users do using namespace boost::bind...
or using namespace boost::phoenix... explicitly? If so, which fix is better?

Thanks.
--Lorenzo

--
View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/bind-phoenix-unified-placeholders-yea-or-nay-tp4630559p4630569.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.