From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-14 19:07:15
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:u4qqiep5w.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
>
> Just to clarify, we're talking about mpl::lambda here.
Right.
> "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> [...]
> > Now, my understanding is that we can use Lambda so that we can
> > invoke Foo this way:
> >
> > Foo<P> f;
>
> for some definition of "invoke" ;-)
I like to think of "operator<>" as the "metafunction call operator". ;>
It helps me to think of it in a more MPL-like way.
> [...]
> In the upcoming version of MPL (very soon now) mpl::apply --
> which you'll want to use even to invoke metafunction classes
> portably (no, using P::template apply<whatever>::type doesn't
> work everywhere) --
Really? Where does that not work?
> will invoke mpl::lambda internally, so the upshot is that passing
> either lambda expressions or metafunction classes will work.
Cool. Is "Real Soon Now(TM)" within the next month?
Dave
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.683 / Virus Database: 445 - Release Date: 5/12/2004