Demystifying C++ lambdas

http://blog.feabhas.com/2014/03/demystifying-c-lambdas/

by SirOibaf • 12 years ago

28 9 12 years ago

blog.feabhas.com

cousin_it2• 12 years ago

Basically, lambdas are syntactic sugar, designed to reduce a lot of the work required in creating ad-hoc functor classes.

Abstraction inversion. Lambda is a much simpler idea than all this C++ stuff used to explain it. Languages should have lambda first, and bullshit like "functor classes" second, if at all.

cheepin• 12 years ago

Lambdas are not particularly complicated, but the way to make them simple is to compare to other language's implementation, not other C++ features.

lobo_tuerto• 12 years ago

It depends on who are you explaining it to.

If you are explaining it to a seasoned C++-only programmer it makes sense to explain lambdas in terms of other C++ features. Even more if lambdas are based internally on said features.

emsy• 12 years ago

I disagree. It's easier to comprehend the scope and lifetime of bound variables and lambdas if you already know them from normal objects. I had a hard time to grasp the lifetime of my lambdas and how the variables were bound, stored and passed to a function.

Of course, C++ is hugely impacted by its legacy burden. Any newer language would probably do it in a simpler way. Still, the fact that lambdas and objects use the same scope makes things much easier to understand remember.

bcoates• 12 years ago

C++ lambdas are not CS-theory lambdas and they're (by definition) syntax sugar for the functor-class bullshit they're described as in the article.

zschoche• 12 years ago

In most cases, lambdas are rvalues. That can have an impact on its scope and lifetime.

Demystifying C++ lambdas

Related Stories