Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] Formal review
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-01 01:53:50
Mere moments ago, quoth I:
> Simplifying expected<T, E> into result<T> and outcome<T> makes sense,
> and the design of error_code_extended seems reasonable, including the
> content and ring buffer history.
Another related point that I forgot to mention:
The default ring buffer size seems too small, especially for
multi-threaded use. The docs specify that it's possible to enlarge it
but I worry this could be problematic if not consistently sized between
multiple translation units.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk