From: Jim Argeropoulos (jaa_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-01-15 16:38:38
> This is the fault of the definition of logical_and/logical_not.
I realize that.
> > Second, few practicing programmers are going to figure it out. If we
call it
> > a solution I would like to see some helper functions for it. Of the 30
> > programmers I work with I would only expect one other to ever figure
out how
> > to put compose_f_gx_hy() to use on their own. Its just too abstract for
> > them. Maybe in a few years, but not today. Those who partake in this
mailing
> > list think at a different level than the average programmer.
>
> You have a good point. The right implementation approach would be to
> use the compose library to implement your library. A few typedefs and
> some small functions would be all that it would take. Also such
> an implementation would be a good resource for people to look at and
> learn about programming with functors.
If you look at the end of my submission, I have an attempt to get arround
the logical_X problem by creating a set of objects I called
BinaryPredicateAndComposer and BinaryPredicateOrComposer. It failed with the
same error that compose_f_gx_hy failed.
I will put together some code if someone is willing to do some testing for
me. I have no way to know if it is correct given my compiler(gcc on Be)
won't compile it.
Jim