Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Improved function object adapters

Expand Messages
  • Mark Rodgers
    Recently I posted a comment on comp.lang.c++.moderated about how I used boost::call_traits to rewrite the standard binders and member function adapters, and
    Message 1 of 4 , May 2, 2000
      Recently I posted a comment on comp.lang.c++.moderated about how I
      used boost::call_traits to rewrite the standard binders and member
      function adapters, and thus avoided the problem of references to
      references.

      Consequently someone emailed me and suggested I package these up and
      submit them to Boost. I certainly don't mind doing that if you folks
      think it would be worthwhile, and if no-one has done (or is doing)
      something similar already.

      Comments?

      Mark
    • Dave Abrahams
      ... go for it.
      Message 2 of 4 , May 2, 2000
        on 5/2/00 4:08 AM, Mark Rodgers at mark.rodgers@... wrote:

        > Consequently someone emailed me and suggested I package these up and
        > submit them to Boost. I certainly don't mind doing that if you folks
        > think it would be worthwhile, and if no-one has done (or is doing)
        > something similar already.
        >
        > Comments?

        go for it.
      • John Maddock
        Mark, ... used boost::call_traits to rewrite the standard binders and member function adapters, and thus avoided the problem of references to references.
        Message 3 of 4 , May 2, 2000
          Mark,

          >Recently I posted a comment on comp.lang.c++.moderated about how I
          used boost::call_traits to rewrite the standard binders and member
          function adapters, and thus avoided the problem of references to
          references.

          Consequently someone emailed me and suggested I package these up and
          submit them to Boost. I certainly don't mind doing that if you folks
          think it would be worthwhile, and if no-one has done (or is doing)
          something similar already.
          <

          I would say go for it, it was something I considered back when we were
          discussing call_traits, but I've never had a pressing need to use them so I
          haven't written any :-)

          I don't know if there is any boost policy on better/alternative
          implementations of existing standard library components, but I don't see
          why we shouldn't foster that kind of thing here?

          - John.
        • Gary Powell
          ... The lambda library (LL) function bind does this, and more. While I am interested in other solutions, you ought to take a look at this one first. There is
          Message 4 of 4 , May 2, 2000
            --- snip --
            > Consequently someone emailed me and suggested I package these up and
            > submit them to Boost. I certainly don't mind doing that if you folks
            > think it would be worthwhile, and if no-one has done (or is doing)
            > something similar already.
            >
            > Comments?
            ----- end quote ---

            The lambda library (LL) function "bind" does this, and more. While I am
            interested in other solutions, you ought to take a look at this one first.

            There is an older copy in the vault or you can get the latest version at.

            http:\\lambda.cs.utu.fi

            -Gary-

            gary.powell@...
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.