XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: tom_shelton@comcast.invalid   
      
   Chris Ahlstrom formulated on Sunday :   
   > Tom Shelton pulled this Usenet face plant:   
   >   
   >> Chris Ahlstrom pretended :   
   >>>   
   >>> Hmmm.  As far as I can tell, a delegate is a function pointer, or a member   
   >>> function pointer.  (I know there is more to it than that, of course).   
   >>   
   >> I would say that a delegate is closer to the function objects in the   
   >> STL.  A delegate is an object that wraps a function pointer.   
   >   
   > This discussion could get pretty hairy!  A delegate also lets you insert   
   > functions into the list, so they all get called.  A bit of a solution   
   > looking for a problem, but nifty.   
   >   
      
   Yes, it allows for multi-cast scenario's where one object can notify   
   multiple clients with a single call.   
      
   > Strictly speaking, at least in C++, a function object is merely a class with   
   > a user-defined 'operator ()' function.  boost::bind() will let you bind   
   > parameters to global, static, or member functions (and to specific instances   
   > of objects), converting them to function objects.   
   >   
      
   There certainly not exactly the same, I only meant that a delegate is   
   more of an object oriented wrapper around a function pointer.   
      
   > Anyway, there's quite a difference in the way C# and C++ apportion   
   > functionility between the language itself and to libraries.  No doubt that   
   > C# is pretty tightly coupled to .NET.   
      
   C# is coupled to .net for certain things, but that's what it was   
   designed for :)   
      
   --   
   Tom Shelton   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)