Re: [boost] [safebool] Can we generalize it and put it into utilities?

Subject: Re: [boost] [safebool] Can we generalize it and put it into utilities?
From: Vladimir Batov (vladimir.batov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-29 21:29:32

> vicente.botet <vicente.botet <at> wanadoo.fr> writes:
> ...
> Yes, this seems much more simple and open than the mixin approach. 
> Why do you use result instead of unspecified_bool_type. The following it
enough clear to me
> 
> class Foo
> { ...
>   operator safebool::unspecified_bool_type() const { 
>     return safebool(my_condition); 
>   }
> };

For users' sake I'd like to stay within the mainstream vocabulary. Like type,
value, result, etc. Indeed, for an initiated person the "unspecified_bool_type"
looks familiar. However, I still remember the what-the... feeling when I came
across it first time.

> I like it anyway,
> Vicente

Glad to hear I am not alone. 

Best,
V.