Re: [boost] [review] string convert

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] string convert
From: Vladimir Batov (vbatov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-05 17:35:42

> Vicente BOTET <vicente.botet <at> wanadoo.fr> writes:
> 
> Sorry. I believed we had a consensus ...

Did you actually say 'consensus'? LOL

> Could we state if the default_value CP is adopted? 
> How think is not a good thing and why?

I am certainly looking at the idea from my original 'convert' point of view
where such a thing was not needed. I find the need to write something like

template <>
default_value<example>
{
   static example apply() { return example(3); }
};

quite bothersome as I know I really do not have to. In the original wacky design
the fallback and the default were synonyms. Now you are introducing an
additional piece of machinery/code that is needed to deploy a class with
conversion and I have to provide the default and the fallback. With that in mind
I am not sure I am personally warming up for default_value concept yet.

V.