From: Eric Friedman (ebf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-09 21:10:02
> There are a lot of disadvantages in allowing variants to be singular at any
> time. We've been all over this. But if we say they can be singular only
> after a failed assignment, then you can pretty safely ignore the possibility
> in most of your code... I think. I wonder what Eric and Dave think of this
> or if they finally got tired of all the noise and tuned out :) Maybe this
> is noise too :)
I've suggested it before.
From an implementation standpoint, there is no problem at all with
singular variants; I can code variant so that it destroys itself
properly even when in a singular state. As well, since assignment to a
singular variant is a meaningful operation, it is possible to "restore"
a singular variant to full-status. However, visitation of a singular
variant is *not* a meaningful operation in anyway and should be left
Given that singular variants will *only occur in the wake of failed
assignment*, this may not be a problem. Allowing the possibility of
singular variants at all, however, does represent a departure from where
variant has been in the past. Before I make a change like this, I would
appreciate some sort of consent from the community. So far, this has
been significantly lacking.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk