Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] To variant, or not to variant?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-01 17:47:03
Robert Ramey wrote:
> Right - so isn't variant the place to "fix" it? if outcome, expected,
> optional ... need a never-empty guarantee, should variant (std, boost,
> whatever) have that guarantee as well? Shouldn't these discussions take
> place in the context of variant?
There were prolonged and furious debates on this topic while std::variant
was getting standardized, and the side who wanted a never-valueless variant
(that would be me) lost.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk