Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] Ternary logic -- need an example
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-19 20:37:05
Le 18/05/2017 à 16:41, Niall Douglas via Boost a écrit :
>> Also applies to other possible combinations such as expected<expected<T,
>> E1>, E2>, outcome<expected<T, E>>, and so on that can all in principle
>> be flattened into a single variant under the hood.
> Earlier Expected proposals had all sorts of useful semantics for nested
> expected. They have been removed from the most recent proposal.
Niall, are you talking of my proposals? If yes, could you recall me what
was there and was removed?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk