Re: [boost] [optional] Safe optional

Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] Safe optional
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-18 20:14:32

On 19/11/2014 13:55, Vladimir Batov wrote:
> On 11/19/2014 10:52 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
>> Things are moving in C++ to the functional paradigm very quick. People
>> would need to learn,  soon or late,  functional programming and
>> monads. I'm sorry, they are viral !!!
>
> You may well be right... Still, I would not be that quick and decisive
> underestimating people's inertia. After all, functional programming
> languages have been around much longer than C++. I do not see them
> occupying minds of the programming majority. Even using primitive
> functional programming in C++ (say, std::for_each instead of ol' and
> trusty for loop) has not been exactly "viral". :-)

A lot of that has been the lack of proper lambdas and closures until 
"recently" (even now, many people are still using pre-C++11 compilers).

While it's certainly *possible* to write functional-ish code without 
these, I don't think anyone would disagree that "bind" and friends 
uglify the code and often require contortions to provide required inputs 
and outputs.