Re: [boost] [optional] update

From: gregod_at_[hidden]
Date: 2003-09-17 11:31:59

On Wednesday 17 September 2003 11:46 am, Guillaume Melquiond wrote:
> 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

I'll finish off the documentation and get it into the review queue.

        Doug