Re: [Boost-users] [review] Formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library - extended until sunday

From: shunsuke (pstade.mb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-22 07:03:33

Tobias Schwinger wrote:
>> If interested, I think I can upload result_of.hpp.
> 
> Sounds good to me - but it isn't up to me to decide.
> 
> You should probably repost this suggestion with '[lambda]' in the
> subject or file a feature request with a patch for that library's
> authors to pick it up.

I will.

> IIRC there was a planned merger of Lambda and Phoenix2. Itseems you have 
> some time to contribute ITM and your "Egg" library showssome experience 
> in that domain. I'm CCing Joel as he might be interested in your help.

I'm not sure I can help, but
I'm sure I know all the compiler bugs around result_of. :-)

> Getting "Factory functionality" out of the Lambda library does not
> deprecate the utility we are reviewing: Using Boost.Lambda just to
> create a single class instance seems sorta wasteful.
> Factory's greatest strength is its simplicity: We can easily make it
> compile (and optimize decently) even with legacy compilers and it's
> lightweight in terms of dependencies and template instantiations.

I agree Boost.Lambda makes compiling slow.
(Actually I have my own Factory-like utilities.)

Regards,

-- 
Shunsuke Sogame