Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Outcome review - First questions
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-24 16:15:53
Le 24/05/2017 à 17:26, Niall Douglas via Boost a écrit :
>>> So yes the above is intrusive, it forces an outcome-y thing to always be
>> This is what I don't like. It is if in order to use rang algorithms I
>> would need to wrap any possible range. We want to be able to use any
>> range without wrapping them.
> Just to be clear, are you talking a range of expected or an expected of
> range? Or something else?
> I am unsure why this policy based extensibility design would be any
> worse than your preferred design of linked up islands of separate
> implementation? After all, one can pretend Outcomes are not implemented
> this way, and are just islands of separate implementation also?
See how the STL is designed. See how the Range TS is designed.
Requiremen based algorithms. You are imposing a single implementation.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk