Re: [boost] in/out parameters, codingstylesandmaintenance

From: Gregory Colvin (gregory.colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-02 10:51:53

On Friday, May 2, 2003, at 09:18 America/Denver, Joel de Guzman wrote:

> Noel Yap wrote:
>> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>>>> But I don't think that a lack of global usage
>>>> guaruntees hinders the potential usefulness of the idea.
>>>
>>> Why? If it's not applied globally, it would be like installing some
>>> security alarm system only in some places in your house. How useful
>>> is that?
>>> There would still be uncertainty.
>>
>> IIRC, at $70.00/window and possibly over a couple of dozen windows,
>> most don't use the security system for every possible entrance to
>> their
>> house, at least not all at once.  How did you go about doing it?
>
> <ot>
> I don't. No offense meant, but I think such incomplete security systems
> are useless. Wasn't that my point?
> </ot>

Depends on how accessible the unsecured windows are.

As I understand it, if the author of an interface imposes the use of 
in/out
decorations then the users of that interface must comply, and thus 
cannot make
certain mistakes, which could translate into fewer bug reports to that 
author.
Whether this is a net win depends on a lot of factors, but my take is 
that it
might be helpful for interfaces like COM that use a lot of out and 
in/out
parameters.  How helpful, I don't know, though when I did COM 
programming I
don't recall this being a big issue.

So, I don't care much whether this goes in Boost, but would find it more
compelling as part of larger library that takes good advantage of it, 
rather
than as a standalone.