Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] Requesting pre-review of Boost.Outcome tutorial
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-11-12 03:53:43

On 11 Nov 2016 at 17:36, Steve M. Robbins wrote:

> > To that end, I've written
> > an explanation and a sort of tutorial explaining the history and
> > purpose of Outcome at and I'd
> > greatly appreciate if people could tell me:
> >
> > 1. Does it make sense?
> I really liked the initial history of error handling design patterns -- it was
> clear and I appreciated seeing the same running example through the different
> design approaches.


> However, when it came to "Introducing Outcome", it no longer felt like an
> introduction. I was expecting another iteration of the running example using
> the new library but instead was dropped deep into a design comparison with
> "Expected". Not knowing anything about the design of Expected, this is
> where I stopped reading. I skimmed to the end, but essentially understood
> nothing from it. The basic_monad class template was not motivated and went
> way over my head. The "Examples of usage" section contained too much
> obscuring detail and had too many extra things in it like the BOOST_OUTCOME_*
> macros which were only explained after the code.

This is really useful, thanks.

I think what I might do is to relocate the WG21 speak discussion to
elsewhere and maybe even relocate any mention of expected<T, E> to
elsewhere. Just focus on an Outcome based design to continue the
theme you mentioned.



ned Productions Limited Consulting

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