Eric Niebler wrote:
> On 12/28/2010 5:39 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
>> I just saw that you added functional::at.
>> I was wondering about the rationale of your decision to make it a non
>> My gut feeling would have been to have proto::functional::at<N>(seq)
>> and not proto::functional::at(seq, N).
> Think of the case of Phoenix placeholders, where in the index is a
> when< terminal<placeholder<_> >, _at(_state, _value) >
when<terminal<placeholder<_> >, _at<_value>(_state)>
> For the times when the index is not a parameter, you can easily do:
> _at(_state, mpl::int_<N>())
just wondering ... the second version looks more "natural" and consistent
proto mailing list