[Boost-users] Re: composition and arguement binding: what to use:boost::bind vsboost::mpl vs boost::lambda

From: Robert Mathews (rmathews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-17 09:48:47

"Kevin Wheatley" <hxpro_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:4239550C.B3B82BE0_at_cinesite.co.uk...
> David Abrahams wrote:
> > And unless Boost.Lambda has been updated since I looked, there are
> > some nice things that Boost.Bind handles automatically, like calling
> > through smart pointers, that aren't quite so easy with Boost.Lambda.
>
> I tried recently to use containers of smart pointers
> (boost::shared_ptr) and ran into a real mess of error messages (VC++
> 7.1), even though I was doing a 'simple' std::find_if() with a _1 ==
> value test.

>
> When I had simple pointers Boost.Lambda worked nice and cleanly, but
> switching to shared_ptr, was almost impossible to work out what was
> going on, I simply switched to a few composed boost::bind()s and it
> worked first time, so I have to agree here that Boost.Bind wins out on
> this simple use, even though it looses the nice syntax of
> Boost.Lambda.
>

FWIW, my mileage with Boost.Lambda was much the same - the simple cases
worked fine, but anything with smart pointers didn't work well. On other
hand, I found that boost::bind worked simply and cleanly, and was a vast
improvement over the stl memfun/memfun1/etc family of functions. (I'm also
using VC++ 7.1)

> Subsequently, the containers now contain std::pair's to shared_ptrs,
> so I have even more composition going on, which for a one off
> 'function' is getting messy, with Lambda it should be much simpler so
> I'd certainly like to know if I missed something with this.
>
> Kevin
>
> -- 
> | Kevin Wheatley, Cinesite (Europe) Ltd | Nobody thinks this      |
> | Senior Technology                     | My employer for certain |
> | And Network Systems Architect         | Not even myself         |