Subject: Re: [boost] Template metaprogramming libraries
From: Gordon Woodhull (gordon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-09 20:05:46
On Sep 9, 2011, at 5:12 PM, Gordon Woodhull wrote:
> Is there a summary somewhere of the difference between your approach and MPL's?
Okay I have read
Functional Extensions to the Boost Metaprogram Library
Now I get it, lazy extensions for MPL, and all the other goodies you would expect from a haskell-like functional programming library.
And now monads too.
Bravo! I hope you bring these libraries to Boost. I crave the simpler syntax and ability to create more complex of pure lazy evaluation.
Have you measured compilation performance versus more-eager MPL implementations of the same algorithms, to see how bad the abstraction penalty is?
I am looking at porting various Boost.Graph algorithms to my proposed MPL.Graph. Do I understand that monads will help me define metadata structures like heaps and forests that don't seem to "map" easily to functional programming?
Cheers,
Gordon