I've noticed that call_traits doesn't support function references.
I'm not sure whether it makes sense to store function references in
optionals, though, but in any case.
Something like this fails:
typedef void (afuncref)(int);
typedef call_traitsafunc::reference t;
The problem is that the
In our last exciting episode David Abrahams wrote:
Lines: 21
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (windows-nt)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xHnNZYZvlhxQjoXn7OJygCVNff4=
Jaakko Jarvi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Boosters,
We submitted enable_if for formal review in July
Hi Boosters,
We submitted enable_if for formal review in July. The library does not
seem to be on the review queue, and maybe it is not worth a full
review. There was a kind of unofficial mini review after our
submission, which brought up a few issues:
1. Whether to make enable_if MPL-aware or
In our last exciting episode Daniel Frey wrote:
Lines: 21
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312
Jaakko Jarvi wrote:
The submitted version is in the sandbox:
boost/utility
libs/utility
and in the Files section at YahooGroups. Note that none
In our last exciting episode Neal D. Becker wrote:
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3
I'm thinking that it would be useful to implement a traits class that would
give the return type of mixed scalar-complex arithmetic operations. This
would allow one to write generic algorithms that operate on both
In our last exciting episode Markus Werle wrote:
Lines: 24
Mail-Copies-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: KNode/0.6.1
Jaakko Jarvi wrote code that looks like this:
template bool B, class T = void
struct disable_if: public enable_if !B, T {};
I have a question regarding compile time
In our last exciting episode Howard Hinnant wrote:
On Wednesday, July 2, 2003, at 06:06 PM, Jaakko Jarvi wrote:
libs/utility/test/enable_if*
Would it be possible to augment the enable_if_constructors.cpp test
with a templated container? Maybe something like:
Yes it would be possible
In our last exciting episode Thomas Witt wrote:
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
On Wednesday 09 July 2003 21:09, Jaakko Jarvi wrote:
Where we've used enable_if, it has been very common that the condition
is not just a single traits lookup, but rather a logical expression,
e.g.:
template class
In our last exciting episode Markus Werle wrote:
With enable_if this can be reduced to say it once and for all times:
Users just have to specialize a traits class
template class T struct DaixtroseTraits
{
enum { use_default_ops = false };
};
and I change my operators to
template
Dear Boosters,
The enable_if library defines the enable_if and disable_if templates,
which are tools for controlling which function templates are included
in the overload resolution set based on the properties of the argument
types.
The following example demonstrates their use:
template class T
Hi Beman others,
One thing is slightly confusing. The second paragraph says:
The copyright notice in the Software and this entire statement,
_including the above license grant_,
this restriction and the following disclaimer, must be included ...
The author of a derivative work can put
The bug is in the documentation.
All of the compilers are right. The complier can choose to evaluate
i=2 before _1+i which results in the lambda functor
_1 + 2
or _1+i before i=2 which gives
_1 + 1
Anyway, the point of the documentation was to say that the lambda functor
stores the value
Hi,
The problems with 2.95 were in bind overloads and deducing function
references, if I remember correctly. However, the bind
overloading was changed at some point for other reasons, and that can have
fixed the trouble.
I can't now even get the deque error you mention, can you send me
the error
I applied the patch. So for gcc 2.96, lambda now includes deque, and
works as a compensation for this extra dependency.
Jaakko
On Thu, 22 May 2003, Daniel Frey wrote:
Jaakko Jarvi wrote:
I can't now even get the deque error you mention, can you send me
the error listing (maybe outside
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Beman Dawes wrote:
Here is my list of outstanding patches and fixes. It would be great if we
could resolve the bulk of these for 1.30.0.
* tuples::apply
Did this every get resolved? Aleksey? Jaakko?
Aleksey's message on Feb 15 had slipped by :(
Looking at his
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
David A. Greene wrote:
The fundamental problem is that it's inconvenient to iterate through a
tuple.
'tuple_ext' (tuple extensions) make it easier -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Boost-Users/message/704.
Has any discussion taken place about
make_tuple(ref(x1), ref(y1), ref(z1)) ...
Isn't this equivalent to
tie(x1, y1, z1) tie(x2, y2, z2)
?
I think so!
It is.
/Jaakko
___
Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Fernando Cacciola
wrote:
As a final touch in the Numeric Conversion library I have almost ready, I
want to add it named template parameters for easier usage.
Were can I borrow the State of the Art implementation of this idiom from?
Don't know about state of the art,
18 matches
Mail list logo
