Re: [boost] [core] Determining interest for two new classes: readonly and newtype

Subject: Re: [boost] [core] Determining interest for two new classes: readonly and newtype
From: Darren Cook (darren_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-16 13:47:21

> readonly<T>:
> 
> This is a wrapper class for a type to replace a const-type field in a
> movable class. It has const access to the type so can't modify except for
> the move constructor and move assignment operator.
> 
> This solves the problem that no fields in a movable class can be const
> which can cloud the intentions of a field.

This reminded me of something I hit recently: I wanted to have a bunch
of fields to be const, but in one constructor I needed to initialize
them in the constructor body, not in the initializer list.

This created two problems. I thought I might be able to get around the
first (of how to actually set them) by using casts; the second problem
was the compiler warnings that I was not initializing all const members.
I couldn't work that one out, so I gave up and removed const from all of
them.

Would your readonly<T> have helped me here?  (And, conversely, if it
could, that implies the compiler cannot warn when they are not initialized?)

Darren