From: Nicola Musatti (Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-06 09:11:39
Edward Diener <eldiener <at> tropicsoft.com> writes:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
> > While I agree consideration of null handling using optional makes sense,
> > there has been some controversy in the past about the optional
> > interface...so beaware that this approach may bring criticism from some
> > people.
> What better way is there of specifying a database null value being
> passed to or returned from a column of a particular row other than to
> use boost::optional is the key question. I believe the criticism of
> optional in the past regards using it with optional references, but when
> passing and returning database null values, only values would normally
> be used.
I think Jeff refers to objections that have been raised about using pointer-like
syntax for things that are not pointers.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk