RE: [boost] Re: Variant implementation change (was re: unions) finalsummary

From: Brock Peabody (brock.peabody_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-09 14:40:22

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of E. Gladyshev

> > (6) You can get the behavior in (4) by specifying boost::empty as one of
> the
> > possible types in variant.  Can't argue with that.
> 
> Not true. variant< my_type, empty > technically variant
> can reinitialize (in case of an exception) my_type, not 'empty'.
> It is not the same as singular variant. That is _fact_.

OK, reword (6) to be: "You can get the behavior in (4) by specifying
boost::empty as the first type in a variant".

As for the rest, I'll let someone else try to convince you if they want :)

Brock