alt Hacker News> I’ve used std::function<> and I’ve used lambdas and what pushed me away from them were crash reports.
In danger of pointing out the obvious: std::function does note require lambdas. In fact, it has existed long before lambdas where introduced. If you want to avoid lambdas, just use std::bind to bind arguments to regular member functions or free functions. Or pass a lambda that just forwards the captures and arguments to the actual (member) function. There is no reason for regressing to C-style callback functions with user data.
Replies
> In fact, it has existed long before lambdas where introduced.
Both std::function<> and lambdas were introduced in C++11.
Furthermore absolutely no one should use std::bind, it's an absolute abomination.
std::bind is bad for him for the same reasons std::function is bad though
I did use bind earlier in SumatraPDF.
There are 2 aspects to this: programmer ergonomics and other (size of code, speed of code, compilation speed, understandability).
Lambdas with variable capture converted to std::function have best ergonomics but at the cost of unnamed, compiler-generated functions that make crash reports hard to read.
My Func0 and Func1<T> approach has similar ergonomics to std::bind. Neither has the problem of potentially crashing in unnamed function but Func0/Func1<T> are better at other (smaller code, faster code, faster compilation).
It's about tradeoffs. I loved the ergonomics of callbacks in C# but I working within limitations of C++ I'm trying to find solutions with attributes important to me.