Subject: Re: [boost] [function] Multi-signature function?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-03-11 12:45:01
AMDG
On 03/11/2014 09:22 AM, TONGARI J wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I know it'd be better to say "overload", but I choose the word carefully
> because I'm aware of Boost.OverloadedFunction, which is not what I'm
> talking here (it's complementary, though).
>
> What I want is to have std/boost::function support multi-signature itself,
> instead of relying on some external wrapper which is less efficient. For
> example:
>
In Christ,
Steven Watanabe