Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [result_of] now uses decltype on release branch
From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-04 22:29:52

On 9/5/2012 10:08 AM, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Sep 4, 2012, at 8:01 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
>> On 9/5/2012 12:53 AM, Michel Morin wrote:
>>> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>>>> However! This makes the current result_of code not an exact replacement
>>>> to decltype which allows this variation of above:
>>> Right. boost/std::result_of is not an exact replacement to decltype,
>>> since decltype allows SFINAE but boost/std::result_of doesn't.
>>> [...]
>>>> If Fusion's invoke used decltype instead of
>>>> result_of, it would have worked.
>>> I tried to compile my test case for fusion::invoke with SFINAE-enabled
>>> result_of, but it failed to compile. After adding a "fallback type" to
>>> SFINAE-enabled result_of, then the test case runs fine.
>> The following code (attached) demonstrates the problem of
>> Fusion::invoke with the current decltype based result_of. Comment
>> out the first line for the code to use plain decltype vs. result_of.
>> Notice that because result_of does not allow SFINAE, it barfs when
>> the compiler tries the first overload of invoke (substitution failure).
>> The compiler could have chosen the second overload.
>> I see no other way to get around this problem of result_of. I am
>> getting inclined to use decltype directly in fusion instead of
>> going through result_of. Problems like this kinda defeats the
>> purpose of decltype-ifying result_of, but heck.
>> The question is: should we allow SFINAE for result_of. I think now
>> that we should.
> Thanks for the sample code, Joel. I don't exactly understand the problem though. Why
overload invoke? Isn't this the perfect occasion to use rvalue references? invoke could be
defined as follows and everything would work fine.
> template <typename F, typename Arg>
> typename boost::result_of<F(Arg&&)>::type
> invoke(F f, Arg&& arg)
> {
> return f(boost::forward<Arg>(arg));
> }
> The decltype-based result_of constructs the call-expression using rvalue-references
> (via
boost::decval) for perfect forwarding.

Yes, I agree. This is the perfect occasion to use rvalue references.
What you wrote is a plausible solution and one I am looking into
right now (not as simple as the test code though).

However... that is pretty much besides the point. And the point is that
the current decltype based result_of breaks with overloads.


Joel de Guzman

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at