Re: [boost] Re: [optional]output

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-09 09:29:17

David Abrahams wrote:
> If you want to be unambiguous, it has to be more like:
>
>     [hello] <- a non-empty optional<std::string>
>     []      <- a non-empty optional<std::string> (the string is empty)
>     _       <- an empty optional<T>

My preference is

    hello

    _

A string can never be output "correctly", no matter what the delimiters are 
("a] [b"). I'd concentrate on making optional<X> (reasonably) bi-directional 
when X is bi-directional.