Re: [boost] [outcome] Second high level summary of review feedback accepted so far

Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] Second high level summary of review feedback accepted so far
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-05 14:46:25

Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:

> Oh, in this case it is clear that result<T> is not enough. We need 
> expected<T, filesystem::error>
>
> where filesystem:error contains the error_code and the path.

I don't find this particularly appealing, because the whole point of 
std::error_code was to avoid the need for each library to define separate 
error classes. expected<T, filesystem::error> will work, I'd just not be 
willing to recommend it as a general solution.

Something like Niall's new outcome<T> that stores both an error_code and an 
exception seems better, because you can use a single common return type in 
all libraries.