Subject: Re: [boost] [bind][phoenix] unified placeholders, yea or nay?
From: lcaminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-28 02:48:18
Eric Niebler-3 wrote
> On 5/27/2012 8:26 PM, lcaminiti wrote:
>> Eric Niebler-3 wrote
>>> On 5/27/2012 4:35 PM, lcaminiti wrote:
>>>> 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
>> complex Bind compiler errors).
>> However, would the ambiguity also be resolved by moving Bind's
>> out of the global namespace and have users do using namespace
>> or using namespace boost::phoenix... explicitly? If so, which fix is
> I am not proposing making any change that would break end-user code. I'm
> not necessarily opposed to that change, it's merely a separate
> discussion. If that's an issue that is important to you, please start a
> separate thread.
OK, I understand. On the unification work you are proposing, as I said, I'd
find it useful.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/bind-phoenix-unified-placeholders-yea-or-nay-tp4630559p4630574.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk