220 4617 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Zhihao Yuan Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Changing lambda scope Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 04:34:44 -0400 Lines: 30 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <90375ba5-8005-47da-9e84-eee151d0ba0a@isocpp.org> <2e120ca5-740b-4301-8a32-8ac5035fa108@isocpp.org> <0df9d0d8-a752-4841-ba02-54780590f722@isocpp.org> <87d2sd5k77.fsf@euclid.axiomatics.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1369643688 14289 80.91.229.3 (27 May 2013 08:34:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 08:34:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: gdr@axiomatics.org To: "std-proposals@isocpp.org" Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCUILMGRQMARBJNVRSGQKGQEAIEPXDA@isocpp.org Mon May 27 10:34:49 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-gg0-f197.google.com ([209.85.161.197]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UgstD-0007Xn-AH for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 May 2013 10:34:47 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-gg0-f197.google.com with SMTP id u1sf7335753ggn.0 for ; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=dHHimt/4WzAWjWrdGWAkkakqqAEh8Ugok60LAWqwQuI=; b=iykHORzmFD2k8bSncj7CdKiX++taD4PLLP7HD/0Hns/PbQ2+DOJPyAkZbDedCgfG7j Hndwtt4geNmSoK5C4BGEZsWy1WuwTjq+7Z30xfSwwFLMjj5YrTqNfTz+ggSokht1+WAD No9u2suzR57QPY3yQQD2G+TiCMpFhQV2YDSF7qho7yjYULv7RXX18VLqL54xZ+umbQIm QTQHnI/dSe01Kw+NiIfAbzyspqFAFVfsKLWJpSSwatm8KtoajVwm5h1mEe0QctF2LyZg s7W/1CxFsNOvYpGwsz0iGMLNJKnJZKQwbhuv0rmb0dlP9ieAs4YZWCJkIW3I2rZIAfJ1 CrTQ== X-Received: by 10.224.36.66 with SMTP id s2mr14832568qad.6.1369643686392; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:46 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.127.114 with SMTP id nf18ls2592880qeb.8.gmail; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.52.0.198 with SMTP id 6mr12367397vdg.65.1369643684300; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-vc0-f179.google.com (mail-vc0-f179.google.com [209.85.220.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4si16221878vcd.64.2013.05.27.01.34.44 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lichray@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.179; Original-Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id hz10so4499767vcb.38 for ; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.220.41.84 with SMTP id n20mr14540531vce.25.1369643684137; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.220.132.1 with HTTP; Mon, 27 May 2013 01:34:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: lichray@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lichray@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lichray@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:4617 Archived-At: On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Nicol Bolas wrote: > The fact that there's nothing a lambda can do which you can't do > yourself is a strength of C++ lambdas, not a weakness. It allows you to swap > a lambda for a regular class if the lambda gets too complex for the lambda > syntax to work. I agree lambdas should (must, actually) not go huge. But for the specific case in the thread, if you replace lambda with a named class, you can use operators as member functions, but for lambda, ADL seems to be the only choice. Changing the associated namespace may affect the behavior of existing code, but lambda looks OK since it's unnamed. -- Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray The best way to predict the future is to invent it. ___________________________________________________ 4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/ -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en. .