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

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-09 15:19:16

"Rainer Deyke" <rainerd_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Brock Peabody wrote:
>> (5) If variant can be singular you will need an additional case for
>> each variant and possibly turn many compile-time errors into run-time
>> errors.
>> This is a fact too.
>
> While trivially true, I doubt this is actually important in real code.  If a
> variant operation that only provides the basic guarantee throws, the state
> of the variant is "valid" but undefined.  

Not undefined, but unspecified.  There's a big difference.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com