On 24/04/12 22:31, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 4/23/2012 10:17 PM, Joel Falcou wrote:
On 04/24/2012 12:15 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:

I think this is an important issues to solve as far as Proto grokability
does.

Agreed. It would be very nice to have. But you still have to know when
to use it.

One of my coworker on NT2 tried  to do just this (the norm2 thingy) and
he get puzzled by the random crash.

[...]

The implicit_expr code lived in a detail namespace in past versions of
proto. You can find it if you dig through subversion history. I'm not
going to do that work for you because the code was broken in subtle ways
having to do with the consistency of terminal handling. Repeated
attempts to close the holes just opened new ones. It really should be
left for dead. I'd rather see what you come up with on your own.

The issue Joel had in NT2 was probably unrelated to this. In NT2 we hold all expressions by value unless the tag is boost::proto::tag::terminal. This was done by modifying as_child in our domain.

I strongly recommend doing this for most proto-based DSLs. It makes auto foo = some_proto_expression work as expected, and allows expression rewriting of the style that was shown in the thread without any problem.

There is probably a slight compile-time cost associated to it, though.
_______________________________________________
proto mailing list
proto@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/proto

Reply via email to