as a workaround, which, as I understand, shouldn't be necessary beyond C++14. Now my question is (for the sake of sheer academic discussion):
Shouldn't it be possible to rewrite this struct as a true generic lambda in C++ 14/17 and beyond? And is it worth the task at all (apart from trying to understand lambdas)?
I understand lambdas readily enough but the fact that the "this" pointer is involved (in a constructor initializer list no less) makes it alittle more opaque. (I know can just move it to the body of the C-tor but stil..
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Even the boost 1.70 exampåles uses the same construct, so maybe there's something going on here that just can' be solved by a generic lambda. It just seems to be it shouldn't be necessary.
Just for the sake of argument I start my precompiled header along these lines:
//------------------------------------------------------------------------------// This is pretty academic. But since we *can* check let's do it.//------------------------------------------------------------------------------#ifndef __cplusplus#error Not using C+#endif#define __CPLUSPLUS_PRE_98 1#define __CPLUSPLUS_98_(TRI) 199711L#define __CPLUSPLUS_11 201103L#define __CPLUSPLUS_14 201402L#define __CPLUSPLUS_17 201703L#if (__cplusplus < __CPLUSPLUS_17)#error We make heavy use of the auto keyword and lambdas. We need version 17 at least.#endif
and add this switch to my g++ compile command:
g++ -std=c++17 [...]
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
If you are not the usage of the "default personal IP Ranges such as 10.X.X.X. Or 192.168.X.X. Or 172.Sixteen.X.X you need to add your IP Range as Trusted Range as follows as you can check.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
If you are not the usage of the "default personal IP Ranges such as 10.X.X.X. Or 192.168.X.X. Or 172.Sixteen.X.X you need to add your IP Range as Trusted Range as follows as you can check.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'm tinkering around with the boost examples using asio and beast to write a rudimentary http server.
Many of them, for instance:
https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/develop/libs/beast/example/http/server/async/http_server_async.cpp
and even later ones, make use of an improvised C11 lambda-isdh struct:
as a workaround, which, as I understand, shouldn't be necessary beyond C++14. Now my question is (for the sake of sheer academic discussion):
Shouldn't it be possible to rewrite this struct as a true generic lambda in C++ 14/17 and beyond? And is it worth the task at all (apart from trying to understand lambdas)?
I understand lambdas readily enough but the fact that the "this" pointer is involved (in a constructor initializer list no less) makes it alittle more opaque. (I know can just move it to the body of the C-tor but stil..
Even the boost 1.70 exampåles uses the same construct, so maybe there's something going on here that just can' be solved by a generic lambda. It just seems to be it shouldn't be necessary.
Just for the sake of argument I start my precompiled header along these lines:
and add this switch to my g++ compile command:
Any thought?. I'm not sking for someone to solve it for me. Solving the problem is much of the fun, Just a general pointer, please.
If you are not the usage of the "default personal IP Ranges such as 10.X.X.X. Or 192.168.X.X. Or 172.Sixteen.X.X you need to add your IP Range as Trusted Range as follows as you can check.
If you are not the usage of the "default personal IP Ranges such as 10.X.X.X. Or 192.168.X.X. Or 172.Sixteen.X.X you need to add your IP Range as Trusted Range as follows as you can check.