Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] outcome
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-27 01:22:53

Thanks Vinícius for the review. I had actually been thinking, given your
nitpicks on the documentation, that you didn't get the premise behind
the library design at all. Looks like I got that totally wrong. Sorry
for not believing in you.

> I worked for more than one year under contract using the Rust programming
> language and Boost.Outcome is pretty much the error system we have in Rust
> (with some C++-ification and an experienced C++ unique programmer
> "intuition" to also cover exceptions... and w/o monad ops, of course).

For the purposes of proper disclosure, I should say that both Vinícius
and I worked for the same startup under contract for much of that same
year in Rust, and I think it safe to say that we both took away a
similar opinion on not just Rust, but many other things. Outcome's
design is indeed strongly influenced by my time there.

With regard to the review's feedback, I should emphasise that the
monadic operations currently proposed to WG21 work with anything
matching the ValueOrError Concept, which includes both Expected and
Outcome. So when/if those land, one would be good to go with Outcome.
That is likely 2023 though, at the earliest.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at