Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] Second high level summary of review feedback accepted so far
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-31 12:04:26

On 30/05/2017 22:28, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> Le 30/05/2017 à 21:36, Niall Douglas via Boost a écrit :
>> I intend to put UB "raw" observers on the runtime checked editions,
>> maybe using the form Peter suggested. But I am deeply opposed to having
>> short-to-type-out observers like operator*() do UB unless the type's
>> name loudly declares "I am an unsafe type".
> :(
> I don't understand. Aren't we on a C++ forum? on the review of a C++
> library?
> Do we want to banish narrow contract in this library as if this kind of
> access was the leprose?

People have the statically checked varieties available to them if they
want narrow contracts.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

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