Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] success-or-failure objects
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-23 19:14:50
> Let me further elaborate here.
> A success is a non-failure and a failure is a non-success. I guess that's
> the same understanding everybody has here.
> Now... value-or-error... if it is non-error (value)... I already assume it
> is success. I just don't see a difference between value-or-error and
A value is a value. An error is an error. The meaning of each is weaker
than success or failure. The latter imply *interpretation*, the former
are simply values.
> Not even on the "layer level of language". I see people writing "error
> case" and "failure case" interchangeably. They just mean the same.
> The argument "value-or-error is not what we provide" could buy me if
> Outcome didn't carry a T on the success case, but that is not the case.
Outcome interprets value and error for you according to the rules you
program it with. Hence the choice of the terms success-or-failure.
-- 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