Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome v2] Please comment on new result<T, EC> reference API docs
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-26 14:52:39
>> The only remaining objection now is that result<...> is named the same
>> yet has different semantics depending on its S type. Yet error_code is
>> also a status, it's just a *negative* status rather than a *positive*
> If you are determined to go this way, why not offer two separate templates:
> `annotated` and `result`. The former for the "status" functionality, the
> latter for the Outcome-v1-like "either T or error", and have them just
> share the same implementation. Since they have different semantics and
> member functions why have them share the same name?
So good news for you, yesterday after pondering things over the weekend
I disabled the positive status functionality. It can be reenabled via
macro, but it's off by default. result<T, E> v2 is now a strict subset
of the Outcome v1 result<T>, except you can choose your own E.
I'm not far from finishing outcome<R, S, P>, maybe tomorrow. I'll then
be replacing the v1 implementation with the v2, and get to work on
getting the existing unit test suite to compile and pass.
After that Outcome v2 will undergo at least three months of being tested
in real world usage before I consider it ready for review again. During
this time I'll deliver that AFIO v2 based NuDB alternative I promised
Vinnie, it'll be an excellent test of the v2 Outcome.
-- 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