Subject: Re: [boost] std::optional<T>
From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando.cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-22 11:45:58
On 22-Apr-13 12:09 PM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
> On 22/04/2013 15:05, Fernando Cacciola wrote:
>> On 22-Apr-13 9:37 AM, Nathan Crookston wrote:
>>> Fernando Cacciola wrote:
>>>> Hi People,
>>>> I'm pleased to announce that thanks to the outstanding effort of
>>>> Krzemienski who wrote the standard papers, and Ville Voutilainen who
>>>> champion it during the meetings, we now have std::optional<T> in C++14!
>>> Great news! I'm almost scared to ask, but what did the committee decide
>>> concerning optional<T&>?
>> LOL, I knew people would ask.
>> Well, they decided to drop it from C++14.
> That's not what I remember.
> I thought that what was said is that optional<T&> didn't need to be
That's technically correct.
So I should have said that our proposed specialization for T& was dropped.
> the specification without it was good enough to allow it.
Right, I thought about this and maybe it indeed just works. But I can't
tell for sure since I haven't sit down to test it yet.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk