Re: [Boost-users] formal review of Switch library ends tomorrow (Wednesday, January 9th) - reviews needed

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-09 23:42:48

Tobias Schwinger wrote:
> Tobias Schwinger wrote:
>> My point is that the utility we have here is in fact too different from 
>> phoenix::switch_ to compare the two (and that boost::switch_ is not the 
>> best name):
>>
>> What would be the point in phoenix::switch_ if it wasn't lazy?
> 
> OK, after some thinking I managed to look beyond my own nose and figured 
> out that a non-lazy phoenix::switch_ would be an expression-level switch 
> (like in VHDL or Ruby) and can indeed be a practical thing.

Nice one! Yeah, that too.

> However, I don't think that's what this library is intended for.

That's where our disagreement starts. I don't see any reason why not.
Why settle for a half baked solution when you can, with a bit more
thought and a bit more code, have a truly elegant solution that
encompasses a lot more area in the problem space.

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net