Re: [boost] [outcome] To variant, or not to variant?

Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] To variant, or not to variant?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-01 23:08:08

On 6/1/17 3:54 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Niall Douglas wrote:

> I wanted to write expected<T, E...> so that we have something concrete 
> to discuss regarding standardization, and for that, I needed a 
> never-valueless variant, which is also something that I would rather see 
> in the standard at some point, preferably instead of the current one.

I think we spend too much time thinking about the standard.  Let us 
focus on getting it right, getting it out there, getting people to use 
it, getting feedback on it, making sure there is a version available 
that is maintained, making sure it's well documented and plays well with 
everything else.  Let the standards committee spend their time catching 
up to us.  This has worked well in the past and I believe will continue 
to work best.

I'm 69 years old as I write this.  I could be dead before the it's all 
standardized.

Robert Ramey