Re: [boost] [Boost.Yap] Review results

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.Yap] Review results
From: Zach Laine (whatwasthataddress_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-03-06 16:23:39

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Gavin Lambert via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 2/03/2018 19:16, Louis Dionne wrote:
>
>> - Positional placeholders should stay or go?
>>      Some of the reviewers felt like it was not desirable to provide
>> positional
>>      placeholders as part of Yap, because those aren't the primary
>> purpose of
>>      the library and C++14 obsoletes them with lambdas. Other reviewers
>> felt
>>      like they were in fact very useful and shouldn't be removed. Since no
>>      clear consensus could be reached, no acceptance condition is
>> attached to
>>      this issue. However, I personally favor the removal of placeholders
>> from
>>      the core API on the basis of minimality. I would like to encourage
>> Zach
>>      to check whether their removal would result in API simplifications;
>> if
>>      so, I would encourage (but not require) their removal, at Zach's
>>      discretion.
>>
>
> Even if positional placeholders are needed, anything that requires at
> least C++11 should be using std::placeholders instead of defining custom
> ones, without compelling reason.

I find the ill-formedness of:

 auto i = std::placeholders::_1 + std::placeholders::_2;

to be compelling.

Zach