Boost logo

Boost :

From: James Curran (jamescurran_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-22 09:50:00

Chuck Messenger wrote:
>> * add_options() should use references rather than pointers

> "Pointer for return value" is C semantics. In C++,
> pointers denote optional values. Non-const references are for return
> values.

    I disagree *strongly*. In C and C++, the address-of syntax clearly
indicates that this is a value that will be changed. Your suggestion of
using a non-const reference would require me to check the header file to
find the signature of _every_single_F#$^%ing_function to figure out which
parameters are changed and which one's aren't. (particularly in the case of
add_options() where it would take the causal reader about 10-20 minutes to
find the correct function signature.

>>> * Mandatory options
>> Good idea. Output formatting is the only issue with me.

    um... do you think we could start calling this feature "mandatory
parameters" since "mandatory options" is an oxymoron.

James Curran (personal) (professional)

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at