Ravi wrote:
On Wednesday 14 October 2009 21:59:42 troy d. straszheim wrote:
def("plus", as<int(int, int)>(arg1 + arg2));
This is very cool and pretty intuitive. My main concern is that one needs to
build up the function type in generic code (as opposed to mpl vectors), but we
do have function_types to help us.
I take it that you have a use-case where it is difficult to specify
as<R(A1,A2)>(thing)
and easy to specify
as<mpl::vector<R, A1, A2> >(thing)
Could you elaborate? I'm quite sure there is a way to provide (roughly)
both interfaces:
def("foo", as<int(double, string)>(functor()));
def("foo", as<mpl::vector<int, double, std::string> >(functor()));
but I'm not sure I understand the problem.
You are going to have to propose this as several small patched,
> before Ralf & Dave agree to it.
Shit. I knew this would happen, I've written too much code again.
Dave? Ralf?
-t
_______________________________________________
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
Cplusplus-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
