Re: [boost] [optional] update

From: Guillaume Melquiond (gmelquio_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-17 10:46:57

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, gregod_at_[hidden] wrote:

> On Wednesday 17 September 2003 10:57 am, Mat Marcus wrote:
> >    * Safe optional<bool>'s as tri-bools would be quite useful to me. I
> > personally would sacrifice the convenience of testing without using
> > is_initialized() to gain tri-bools but I don't want to cover old
> > territory. Perhaps there's some other way of making optional<bool>'s
> > safer to use. What would you think of, say, using enable_if (or better
> > disable_if) to disable implicit bool conversion and operator! for when
> > T == bool (or when T already is_convertible to bool)?
> >
> >  - Mat
>
> Why not use a real tribool? There's one in the sandbox.
>
> 	Doug

Speaking of tribool, will it ever be reviewed? It is something I would
like to see in Boost.

Regards,

Guillaume