Future of string lambda functions/string predicate functions

[Brad Anderson]

On Wednesday, 14 August 2013 at 02:05:16 UTC, Manu wrote:
> Can you give an example where you've actually used a string 
> lambda before
> where the predicate is more complex than a basic comparison?
> Surely the solution to this problem is to offer a bunch of 
> templates that
> perform the most common predicates in place of unary/binaryFun?
>
> So rather than: func!((a, b) => a < b)(args)
> You use: func!binaryLess(args)
>
> Or something like that?
>

How about just "less"?  It's what C++ STL uses (std::less, 
std::greater, std::negate, etc...). In C++, however, you have to 
do some truly ugly stuff to actually make use of the predefined 
function objects...bind1st...eww (the new C++11 bind is only 
marginally better but C++11 does have lambdas now at least).

> The thing that annoys me about string vs proper lambda's, is 
> that I never
> know which one I'm supposed to use. I need to refer to 
> documentation every
> time.
> Also, the syntax highlighting fails.
>