Comments on: Think of Function Objects as Functions Rather Than Objects

By: Matt A

Matt A — Thu, 26 Oct 2017 06:22:00 +0000

In reply to Jonathan Boccara. In practice I'd probably take it by value and move it into the lambda, but it makes the code a bit less clear in this example I feel.

By: Jonathan Boccara

Jonathan Boccara — Wed, 25 Oct 2017 22:45:00 +0000

In reply to Matt A. Yes, absolutely! In this case would you rather take the color by reference or by value?

By: Matt A

Matt A — Wed, 25 Oct 2017 06:20:00 +0000

I think you can go further down this road than just change the name though, and instead make hasColor a true higher order function that returns a lambda:

auto hasColor (Color const& color)
{
return [=] (Ball const& ball)
{
return ball.getColor() == color;
};
}

By: Jonathan Boccara

Jonathan Boccara — Sun, 22 Oct 2017 12:33:00 +0000

In reply to Hanna Khalil. Thanks for your comment. So it is the guideline about naming that you disagree with?

By: Hanna Khalil

Hanna Khalil — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:00:00 +0000

I really enjoyed that and gained nice insight about c++’s classification as a hybrid of OO and functional. But I would disagree in regards to the “practical consequences”