Subject: Re: [boost] [result_of] Allow result_of to work with C++11 lambdas
From: Nathan Crookston (nathan.crookston_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-10 13:39:48
Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> Le 10/04/13 19:12, Nathan Crookston a écrit :
> I think individual boost libraries shouldn't need to worry about the
>> macros. Users may need to explicitly define one of the macros if they
>> develop on a compiler which supports decltype-based result_of, but wish to
>> support compilers without decltype.
>> In short, I think that (with the decltype fallback) result_of *will*
>> the best implementation, and (if the patch is applied) defining a macro to
>> explicitly select a back end should be done for cross-platform
>> compatibility reasons.
>> If you are right and after the patch result_of would provide the best we
> can do now, why the user would need to define any of these macros?
I think it would be uncommon for the user to define those macros. Here's a
situation where it may be useful:
I have a library which I claim supports VC9 and Clang. I do my development
with clang 3.2, and rely on some form of automated testing to verify it
works with MSVC. I may commonly forget to add result_type or a nested
struct to my functors, since clang uses decltype. After the Nth time, I
may, during my own development, #define BOOST_RESULT_OF_USE_TR1, just so
that I'm not continually breaking the VC9 build.
So again, I think it's uncommon.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk