Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
>
> | that is of course also my goal. and a lot of intent is hidden in
> | bad nameing. (match() anyone..., ok we are matching... but _what_.
> | Just naming the functor EqualBranchNames() would make things a lot
> | nicer.)
>
> Did you see there there were two functors I removed in the patch for
> this specific thing?
>
> SameName
> match
No.
Look, I understand why you want to introduce this patch and I agree
fully with your reasons. However, I disagree with you when you say
that the resulting code is easy to read. Christian's arguments ring
true to me too --- code should not rely on formatting to be
understandable. His example
return bind(logical_and<bool>(),
bind(equal_to<string>(),
bind(&Converter::from, _1),
from),
bind(equal_to<string>(),
bind(&Converter::to, _1),
to));
is well chosen.
My question is whether we can avoid these arbitrarily-named functors
and have code which is understandable at-a-glance. If the code above
could be replaced with
return (from == lambda::_1.from() && to == lambda::_2.to());
then I'd be very happy indeed.
--
Angus
