Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] little addition... optional_move_to?
From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando.cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-06 08:41:15
> So, an assign_to() API that won't ever move from an lvalue but will always try
> to with an rvalue also makes sense.. and it must be a member function
> nowadays to potentially move from rvalues.
Never mind that.. if for lvalues it *must* copy instead of move, it
can't use swap(), then being a member function won't make any difference!
I see now that's why you said that the third fucntion could be the free
optional_assign_to() by Arno.
Agreed on your list then:
>for the time being I think that adding optional_move_to(T&) and
>optional_swap(T&) members (as I presented), and optional_assign (by
>Arno) should be sufficient.
-- Fernando Cacciola SciSoft Consulting, Founder http://www.scisoft-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk