Re: [boost] Report from Mont Tremblant C++ Committee meeting

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-17 08:47:55

Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>>>>I *really* don't have an opinion about what the right choice should
>>>>be.  That said, terms like gobbledegook seem needlessly judgemental,
>>>>and as such I think they only cloud the issues.
>>>
>>>But, IMO, it *is* unclear and wordy jargon (http://tinyurl.com/954xg)
>>>I find the explanation very difficult to follow. 
>> 
>> 
>> I know what "gobbledegook" means; it's highly pejorative.  A link to
>> the explanation in question would be more useful here.
>
> Oh, I forgot:
> http://boost.org/libs/optional/doc/optional.html#refassign
>
> To this day, I'm still befuddled at the explanation.

Except for the last paragraph -- which I agree is confusing but which
is also not needed to understand the rationale -- it seems perfectly
clear to me.  Reasonable, too.

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