Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] Possible extensions/changes to std::experimental::expected
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-26 11:03:59
Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
> This is only one way of looking at it. Another one is that I have function
> like, `open_file`, I want it to either return the file handle or the
> information about run-time situation that prevented opening the file.
> "reading from uninitialized `expected`" is no such situation: it is simply
> a bug.
As I say in the paragraph immediately before, if your open_file calls
open_file_impl, feeding it invalid arguments, this is simply a bug. Yet when
open_file_impl returns EINVAL to indicate invalid arguments, and you return
that back to the caller, you end up in the exact same situation.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk