Re: [Boost-users] [signals] slot with no SlotFunction template parameter

From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-26 16:54:19

On Monday 26 February 2007 16:19 pm, you wrote:
> I'm implementing a more feature-full slot class with some of the things
> that have been discussed recently.  In particular, it is templated only
> on signature.  It uses a templated constructor to store the slot
> function in a pimpl object that is templated by both signature and slot
> function type. So now I'm about to rip out the SlotFunction parameter
> everywhere from thread_safe_signals, as there no longer seems to be any
> need for it.  I feel like I might be overlooking something though.  Is
> there any reason to keep it?

After a little more reflection, it seems what I have done to get rid of the 
SlotFunction template parameter from the slot class has pretty much the 
same effects as if I just hard-coded the SlotFunction to be 
boost::functionN.  So my question is: what is the point of having the 
SlotFunction be parametrizable, and are we going to miss it?

-- 
Frank