Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Outcome review - First questions
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-24 15:46:08
Niall Douglas wrote:
> I think the source of our disagreement is over publicly exposing the empty
> state. You appear to be happy if it's an internal only thing, but not
> available to end users. I take the view that if you're implementing the
> empty state anyway, might as well open it up for public use.
No, I don't argue for a possible, but unexposed, empty state. I argue that
there should be no empty state. A result should either hold a value or an
error (the reason for the lack of value).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk