From: Nicola Musatti (Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-09 04:44:35
Yuval Ronen <ronen_yuval <at> yahoo.com> writes:
> Nicola Musatti wrote:
> > I think Jeff refers to objections that have been raised about using
> > pointer-like syntax for things that are not pointers.
> I have to second everyone who favors boost::optional. It's IMO
> absolutely the best way of handling null-allowed fields.
I think we need to distinguish between the concept of a type extending a base
type to add the null value to its domain, whose usefullness is not in question
as far as I know, and boost::optional's specific programming interface, which I
expect is appreciated by some, but not by others.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk