[boost] Re: [Review] Named parameters library

From: Daniel Wallin (dalwan01_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-18 09:58:35

David Abrahams wrote:
> However, Thorsten's prodding has made me wonder if we need || for the
> lazy case at all.  It seems as though
> 
>     params.has(name) ? params[name] : something_else;
> 
> is superior in every way except brevity.  And there will be
> substantial cases where it's briefer as well, because there's no need
> to build a function object for something_else.
> 
> Am I missing something?

Yes, I think you are. We want params[name] to be a compilation error if
there is no such parameter supplied by the user and no default. I don't
think the proposed construct can allow that.

IMO, a runtime error here is just not acceptable.

-- 
Daniel Wallin