We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
It would be more convenient if to have a sum of two signals we will have
var_signal<int> a = make_var(1); var_signal<int> b = make_var(1); int c = *a + *b;
instead of
int c = a.get() + b.get(); //or int d = a() + b();
It matches existing pointer semantic much more. Also assignment can be considered.
*a = 10;
To do so, some kind of proxy is required, because we can't just return T const& and T&.
T const&
T&
Hmm... as a silly though. If we add NOP operator++, then signals can be passed in std algorithms both as source and as a destination.
std::copy(vec.begin(), vec.end(), a); std::copy(a.begin(), a.end(), std::back_inserter(vec));
Except the MSVC that requires iterators having the type traits(
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Description
It would be more convenient if to have a sum of two signals we will have
instead of
It matches existing pointer semantic much more. Also assignment can be considered.
*a = 10;
To do so, some kind of proxy is required, because we can't just return
T const&
andT&
.Hmm... as a silly though. If we add NOP operator++, then signals can be passed in std algorithms both as source and as a destination.
Except the MSVC that requires iterators having the type traits(
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: