Re: [Boost-users] Why is cref required in this nested bind example?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Why is cref required in this nested bind example?
From: Chris Stankevitz (chrisstankevitz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-05 13:58:41

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Nathan Crookston
<nathan.crookston_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> //bind(b, bind(a));//*1
>>   bind(b, cref(bind(a)));//*2
>
> In short, *1 is evaluating a()

Thank you.  This surprises me as I thought boost::bind returned an
object of type boost::function.  I need to understand this better and
am about to go read more on this.

> It would be more idiomatic to use protect:
>
> bind(b, boost::protect(bind(a)))

I made the change, thank you.  Hopefully when I understand better what
boost::bind is doing (i.e. not returning a boost::function) it will be
obvious why I need boost::protect.  My guess is that boost::protect
converts whatever boost::bind does return into a boost::function.

Thanks again,

Chris