"Andrei Alexandrescu" <andrewalex@[...].com>  writes:

>  "David Abrahams" <dave@[...].com> wrote in message
>  news:u7kcwwu0e.fsf@[...]..
> 
> > Yeah, I haven't always been very comfortable with the
> > value-per-character of mpl::for_each -- it seems to have similar
> > properties to std::for_each in that way.  It's got certain advantages
> > for re-use:
> >
> >    1. You can use different sequence types (I know Andrei doesn't buy
> >       this one, but I still do; the concept of tuple-as-type-sequence
> >       being one motivator)
> 
>  My understanding is that front and pop_front work with different sequence
>  types, isn't that so? 

Yeah, but I don't think a vector turns to void_ after you've popped
everything off the front ;-)

>  If that's the case, (1) illustrates no advantage of the complicated
>  version over the simple version.

It's all in the non-generic termination condition.

> > I've been talking with Aleksey recently about how to improve the
> > syntactic situation without losing the separation of concerns that we
> > get, but we didn't come up with anything convincingly better.
> 
>  The template pattern matching just makes it too easy... :o)))

It's easy if you can think that way, but not neccessarily clear.

-- 
                       David Abrahams
   dave@[...].com * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost