Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] To variant, or not to variant?
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-02 10:14:11
> But I don't really want to enter these implementations in Boost instead
> of yours. Your implementation has been tested in practice and is more
> feature-rich. The error_code_extended infrastructure adds significant
> value, and if you agree to a larger (or customizable at runtime) ring
> buffer and chaining support, they'll become even better. (Attaching
> information to an error code is a very good idea of yours.)
> In short, I'd rather see your implementations in Boost, but with
> something close to the interface I present - if the community can agree
> on it, of course.
A shame. I already invested six months of effort taking a mature library
and getting it ready for review. I had been hoping to avoid more work on
this, AFIO languishes until Outcome is done.
Still that said, if Outcome changes significantly, better it happens now
before more AFIO code is hard wired around Outcome. Some of the AFIO
filesystem algorithms are quite subtle and rely very heavily on Outcome
behaving exactly just so.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk