Just a question that just struck me. Will this rewrite be backward
compatible with C++03 for the features that make sense ? I think the
C++03 version may benefit from the new expression extension mechanism etc.
___
proto mailing list
On 03/06/2012 09:41, Eric Niebler wrote:
Hey all, this is just an FYI. I've been hard at work at a ground-up
redesign of proto for C++11. I've gotten far enough along that I know
what expression extension will look like, so I thought I'd share. This
should interest those who want finer control
On 6/5/2012 11:10 PM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
On 03/06/2012 09:41, Eric Niebler wrote:
Hey all, this is just an FYI. I've been hard at work at a ground-up
redesign of proto for C++11. I've gotten far enough along that I know
what expression extension will look like, so I thought I'd share.
On 06/06/2012 08:24, Eric Niebler wrote:
The template template parameter is distasteful, I agree, but I can shave
template instantiations this way. There's no need to instantiate a
nested apply template for every new expression type created. Especially
now with template aliases, it's quite
Le 04/06/2012 21:18, Eric Niebler a écrit :
The make_expr function object takes as arguments the tag and the
children. You can do whatever you want. If open extensibility matters,
you can dispatch to a function found by ADL or to a template specialized
on the tag like proto::switch_. It's up to
On 6/4/2012 12:48 PM, Joel Falcou wrote:
Le 04/06/2012 21:18, Eric Niebler a écrit :
Assuming your types are efficiently movable, the default should just do
the right thing, and your expression trees can be safely stored in local
auto variables without dangling references. Does that help?
I
On 6/4/2012 6:08 PM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Proto-11 will probably take many months. I'm taking my time and
rethinking everything. Don't hold your work up waiting for it.
Best thing to do is probably to make it lighter, keep separate things
separate, and truly
