Re: [boost] Re: optional, tie, and iterator_adaptor

From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-01 20:13:45

Dave Gomboc <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [Fernando Cacciola]
>> The most fundamental point is that being Haskell a pure functional
>> language there is no possibly undefined behaviour to worry about,
>> so Maybe doesn't need to address this issue as optional<> does.
> ... and later ...
>> I account the possibly undefined behavior of accesing an uninitialized
>> optional as a real and important problem.
> 
> You can get rid of the possibly undefined behaviour by defining it!  Throw
> an exception when there's an attempted coercion from nil/undefined to a
> normal value.

Exactly!

-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net