From: francis.glassborow@btinternet.com   
      
   On 10/08/2012 22:35, Kaba wrote:   
   > 10.8.2012 21:19, Francis Glassborow kirjoitti:   
   >> On 09/08/2012 19:51, Kaba wrote:   
   >>> Would it make sense to generalize the implicit return-type   
   >>> deduction of the lambda functions to all functions? Motivation:   
   >>> reading the Boost.Proto documentation and seeing something like   
   >>> this:   
   >>>   
   >> But the problem is that only a function declaration is needed in   
   >> order to call a function. How will the caller know what the return   
   >> type is?   
      
   'caller' here refers to a programming element not a programmer.   
      
   > Perhaps the exact type is not always important to the user, such as   
   > in this Proto-example. What is important though is the underlying   
   > concept the type implements. However, without support from the   
   > language the concept would have to be looked up from the   
   > documentation; I could live with that:) But something like this   
   > would be even nicer:   
   >   
   >       auto[Grammar_Concept] f();   
   >   
      
   You are missing the point. Here is an example:   
      
   template g(T t);   
      
   int main(){   
        g(f());  // how is the compiler to deal with this?   
   // ...   
   }   
      
      
   --   
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)