On 26/10/10 19:44, Eric Niebler wrote:
struct my_actions_with_state
{
// specializations to look up transforms
// using rules:
templatetypename Rule
struct when;
// any ol' state can go here:
int my_state;
};
Now, you can pass an instance of my_actions_with_state
On 10/25/10 7:44 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Joel de Guzman
j...@boost-consulting.com wrote:
On 10/25/2010 12:39 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/24/2010 8:32 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 10/25/2010 8:49 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
Like visitor, actor comes with
On 10/25/2010 4:44 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
Thank you very much! So, we are good to changing the internals of
phoenix3 to use this extension mechanism?
Yes. But today I'm going to made some changes, based on my experience
playing with this code last night. In particular, it should be possible
On 10/25/2010 4:44 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 10/26/2010 4:30 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
[...]
Voila! The implementation is trivial: one specialization of proto::when
on the new (incomplete) proto::external type. God, why didn't I think of
this sooner?
The naming issue goes away
You could pass it as state
OK
or bundle it with the external transforms.
All you need is a nested when template. Does that help?
A short example of this for my poor 7am self without coffee ;) ?
___
proto mailing list
proto@lists.boost.org
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Joel de Guzman
j...@boost-consulting.com wrote:
On 10/24/2010 1:16 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
Now, what to call the traveral/algorithm/action/on thingy. None of those
feel right. Maybe if I describe in words what it does, someone can come
up with a good name.
On 10/24/2010 5:10 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Joel de Guzman
j...@boost-consulting.com wrote:
On 10/24/2010 1:16 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
Now, what to call the traveral/algorithm/action/on thingy. None of those
feel right. Maybe if I describe in words what it
On 24/10/10 11:53, Joel de Guzman wrote:
Am I the only one thinking that actor should be more a part of proto
than
phoenix? I'd love to use such a generic extension mechanism for Spirit
too,
for example.
I *need* it for nt2 too, makes some optimisation far simpler than before.
@lists.boost.org
Reply-To: Discussions about Boost.Proto and DSEL design
proto@lists.boost.org
Subject: Re: [proto] Visitor Design Pattern
On 10/23/2010 5:36 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 10:45 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 10:01 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
I think
On 10/23/2010 10:45 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Saturday 23 October 2010 19:30:18 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/23/2010 10:12 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
I've tweaked both the traversal example you sent around as well as my
over toy Phoenix. Tell me what you guys think.
Actually, I think it's better
On 10/23/2010 5:10 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 10/24/2010 2:18 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Saturday 23 October 2010 19:47:59 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/23/2010 10:45 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
Why not just rule? Less characters to type.
I almost called it rule, but *everything* in Proto is a
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
Check out the doc I sent (Annex A). It's really, to my mind,
generic languages -- abstraction of rules and templated grammars
through metanotions and hyper-rules.
Parameterized rules. Yes, I can understand that much. My understanding
stops when I
On 10/22/2010 12:33 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:15:47 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
Check out the doc I sent (Annex A). It's really, to my mind,
generic languages -- abstraction of rules and templated grammars
through metanotions
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:58:25 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 12:33 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:15:47 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
Check out the doc I sent (Annex A). It's really, to my mind,
generic languages --
On 10/22/10 3:15 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
Check out the doc I sent (Annex A). It's really, to my mind,
generic languages -- abstraction of rules and templated grammars
through metanotions and hyper-rules.
Parameterized rules. Yes, I can understand
On 10/22/10 4:17 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:58:25 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 12:33 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:15:47 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
Check out the doc I sent (Annex A). It's really,
On Friday 22 October 2010 11:29:07 Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 10/22/10 4:17 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:58:25 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 12:33 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:15:47 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de
On Friday 22 October 2010 11:29:07 Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 10/22/10 4:17 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:58:25 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 12:33 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:15:47 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/21/2010 7:09 PM, Joel de
On 10/22/2010 10:01 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
I think this is the simplification of client proto code we searched for. It
probably needs some minor polishment though.
snip
Hi Thomas, this looks promising. I'm digging into this now.
--
Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com
On 10/23/10 7:44 AM, Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 11:29:07 Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 10/22/10 4:17 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:58:25 Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 12:33 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 09:15:47 Eric Niebler
-consulting.com
Sender: proto-boun...@lists.boost.org
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 09:29:27
To: proto@lists.boost.org
Reply-To: Discussions about Boost.Proto and DSEL design
proto@lists.boost.org
Subject: Re: [proto] Visitor Design Pattern
On 10/23/2010 5:36 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 10/22/2010 10:45
On 10/21/2010 6:41 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
I like it when we are talking on a conceptual level :-). I think part
of the difficulty is in combining two domains: language/parsing and OOP.
nod
As much as I do not have any problems with visitation, it's also
intersecting with the notion of
22 matches
Mail list logo
