Re: [boost] [lexical_cast] A suggestion

Subject: Re: [boost] [lexical_cast] A suggestion
From: Andrew Troschinetz (ast_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-04 12:27:33

On Feb 4, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Alexander Nasonov wrote:

> Andrew Troschinetz <ast <at> arlut.utexas.edu> writes:
>
>> Here's some example usage: http://codepad.org/hn6MjKjm
>
> It's not clear from the example that this inliner
>
> lexical_cast< optional<int> >("x").get_value_or(-1);
>
> is a replacement for
>
> lexical_cast("x", -1);

I actually hadn't thought of that inliner, but now that I see it I  
prefer it because I think it's cleaner conceptually and from an  
interface standpoint. It also means there's no need for a lexical_cast  
specialization for optional types, which I wrote all the while with a  
feeling of "there must be a better way to do this."

But that inliner still doesn't get around the problem of types that  
aren't default constructible.

--
Andrew Troschinetz
Applied Research Laboratories