Re: [boost] [SPAM (Header)] - Re: [optional] little addition... optional_move_to? - Number of numbers in MIME From exceeds maximum threshold

Subject: Re: [boost] [SPAM (Header)] - Re: [optional] little addition... optional_move_to? - Number of numbers in MIME From exceeds maximum threshold
From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando.cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-06 09:08:26

Hi Arno,

> Regular assignment, without killing the source, should work as well, though.

Right... so your very first proposal can't really be replaced by Niels's 
poposals optional_swap() and move_to().

So the next big question would be:

With C++0x, optional_swap() and otional_move_to(), both worth by their 
own right IMO, will be implementable as free functions, which I prefer 
to member functions.

But that can't be implemented today without a move emulation library, 
like Ion Gaztañaga's Boost.Move.

Yet even if I wanted to use that, I can't before it is formally added 
into boost.

So, the choice *right now* is to either add these two functions as 
members or not add them at all.

But if I add them as members today, there would be a slight 
inconsistency with optional_assing being a free function instead.

Thus, until move semantics are practically usable (whether via 
Boost.Move or C++0x) I would either add the three functions as member 
functions, or just your optional_assign() as a free function, but not 
two members and one free standing.

What do you think?

--
Fernando Cacciola
SciSoft Consulting, Founder
http://www.scisoft-consulting.com