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

From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-18 09:31:36

Alisdair Meredith wrote:
> Sam Partington wrote:
>
> If simply making the specialization illegal allows us to drop the
> issue
> and move forward, that alone makes it worthwhile for me!

I won't give up so easity ;)
I rather give up direct value assignment which seems to be the real root of 
the unexpected semantics.
I suppose anyone will expect _this_ to rebind:

o = optional<int&>(v);

And that assignment alone is all that is really needed. The other is just 
sugar for that.

> Optional
> looks like a great library for TR2, I would hate to see it lose its
> way
> in contentious issues.

Me too :-)
But I think we can still save the wale, I mean, the reference.

> And I doubt the pointer-like interface debate
> can be so easily swept aside ;?)
>
Ya, interfaces are the hardest to agree upon.

Best

-- 
Fernando Cacciola
SciSoft
http://fcacciola.50webs.com/