Subject: Re: [boost] [next gen future-promise] What to call the monadicreturntype?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-26 11:04:39
Niall Douglas wrote:
> Get some experience programming in Rust and come back to me.
This is a very generous offer, which I'm afraid I have to decline at
> I think you'll realise that monadic programming is going to become huge in
> C++ 11/14 in the near future in those use case scenarios where it is far
> better than all other idioms.
With that qualification this statement is trivial, isn't it? My point was
that there do exist other scenarios, where monadic programming of this
particular expected<> variety is not at all far better than other idioms.
Either way, consider my message a naming suggestion for the bikeshedding
session. My naming suggestion is that your type is properly called
This name in no way prevents you from going all monadic on our posteriors.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk