Re: [boost] Re: boost::optional feature request.

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-25 11:44:40

Douglas Paul Gregor <gregod_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Edward Diener wrote:
>
>> Do you really want the key to an associative container to be an optional
>> value ? I would be hard-pressed to find a use for that.
>
> FWIW, the Signals library actually does this internally (although with
> boost::any objects instead of boost::optional objects). However, I would
> contend that the need is too specialized to warrant adding an operator<.

Seems entirely reasonable to me to add it.  It looks like at least two
people have needed exactly those semantics.  What's the cost?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com