On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> wrote: > Jason House wrote: >> >> The first follow-up to your reply captured the kind of messiness bind >> can bring in C++. So far, all your examples are trivial (lack >> argument reordering, function composition, etc...). It's true that >> your examples look clean, but the devil will be in the details. > > I see. The only problem is that very few people seem to use std.bind; there > are few interesting examples of arbitrary partial argument binding that need > formalization. The one good example I know of is those float vector > permutations, but nobody in their right mind would use a delegate for that! > > That all makes it even more appealing to stick with a five-liner in > std.functional that gets currying into the bag (which is a useful and > low-hanging fruit) and call std.bind history. Makes sense?
I think simple is fine here. About the only places I've used boost::bind in C++ are things that I would never use a bind library to do in D, since in D we have nested functions and delegates. Those things knock about 80% of the wind out of a bind library in my opinion. --bb
