Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [variant] Please vote for behavior
From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-28 13:27:06

On 1/29/13 1:40 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
>> I am also
>> >not convinced that drawing from objects with "singular" values is wrong,
>> >regardless if it's a pointer or not. I think it is you who's missing
>> >the point because Iterators are likewise*not* pointers.

> Okay, so replace "recursive_wrappers are not pointers" with
> "recursive_wrappers are not iterators". How does it make it any
> different? A singular value still doesn't fit in.

The point is that iterators can have singular values. If iterators
can have them, why can't any other object (have them)? IMO, ultimately,
it's a matter of design. You may not agree with a recursive_wrapper
being in a "singular" state after move, but that's just your preference.
IMO, it's necessary for proxy-like objects that own and hold their
subjects by pointer. It's not quite elegant, sure, but C++ is never
elegant in many respects for the sake of high performance. I'd trade
this quirk for the sake of efficiency any day.


Joel de Guzman

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at