On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 11:29:49AM +0200, Hartmut Kaiser wrote: > You've done a great piece of code! I've tried to understand your > articles about the differences between fcpp and boost::lambda/bind/etc. > and these (the differences) are now clear to me (to some degree :-). > > OTOH I know, that there is going on serious work to merge boost::lambda > with Phoenix to overcome some well known limitations of both and to > avoid having two similar libraries in boost. Wouldn't it be nice, if > after this merger we'd get _one_ library lambda + phoenix + fcpp? Or > isn't this possible at all?
It may well be possible. I have had a little bit of discussions with Jaakko and Joel (off-list) about this. I have not had the opportunity to think deeply about it though; it is unclear to me if the FC++ implicit assumption of 'value semantics' (FC++ doesn't allow (mutable) reference parameters) will throw a wrench in the works. It is also unclear to me how much "rework" such an integration might necessitate. (I am very pleased to say that integrating/reusing other (small) portions of boost in FC++'s implementation went very smoothly.) This begs another important (at least to me :) ) question about FC++ and Boost. Can FC++ be accepted into Boost prior to any "integration" with lambda/phoenix/bind? I hope that the answer is yes, for a few reasons: - It will give the boost user/developer community the opportunity to gain some experience with FC++, to see better what its merits and demerits are. - It will provide an opportunity to see how well/badly the various libraries interoperate now (as separate libraries), which may expose more of the important integration issues. - It means less time for FC++ to languish in the current state it's in, where I'm doing work to `boostify' and improve it, but no one is using it. I'm still a newbie to this community, so I have no idea what the opinion of the `ruling committee' is (or will be) on these issues. But it would be helpful to me to know (at least to have a better idea where my immediate future lies). So if anyone has opinions or constructive thoughts on this issue, I'd like to hear them. -- -Brian McNamara ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
