On Thursday 14 October 2010 08:29:00 Eric Niebler wrote: > On 10/13/2010 11:08 PM, Thomas Heller wrote: > > On Wednesday 13 October 2010 22:46:40 Eric Niebler wrote: > >> On 10/13/2010 11:54 AM, Thomas Heller wrote: > >>> On Wednesday 13 October 2010 20:15:55 Eric Niebler wrote: > > <snip> > > See my other post about comments on this, I think we agree on the rest. > > The only problem we are diverging right know seems to be that "visitor" > > I proposed. See another attempt to justify, and possibly explaining it > > better below. > > <snip> > > Very quickly before I turn in for the night ... this goes a long way to > making it clearer. Thanks. I'm going to take my own crack at this > problem and see if I end up in the same place you did. Then we can > compare/contrast.
I think having an alternate solution is one way to go. I am very curios on what you will com up with :) > Oh, and I think you're right about proto::make_expr. It cannot make > nullary expressions with tag types other than tag::terminal. Sorry. :-P *Digging into how proto::literal works* _______________________________________________ proto mailing list proto@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/proto