Subject: Re: [boost] Fwd: [review] Review of Outcome v2 (Fri-19-Jan to Sun-28-Jan, 2018)
From: VinÃcius dos Santos Oliveira (vini.ipsmaker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-28 23:17:58
Thanks for the answer. It clears a lot to me.
2018-01-28 20:16 GMT-03:00 degski <degski_at_[hidden]>:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: degski <degski_at_[hidden]>
> Date: 28 January 2018 at 17:11
> Subject: Re: [boost] Fwd: [review] Review of Outcome v2 (Fri-19-Jan to
> Sun-28-Jan, 2018)
> To: VinÃcius dos Santos Oliveira <vini.ipsmaker_at_[hidden]>
> On 28 January 2018 at 16:44, VinÃcius dos Santos Oliveira <
> vini.ipsmaker_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Can you elaborate on your point? If I'm left alone I'll miss your point.
> I was mostly just responding to your example (which you asked me to do),
> and how I would do that, without having to deal with exceptions and/or
> outcomes. But, the more general point is, which Spirit in this case does
> very well, is to deal with potential problems at the source, in an explicit
> (comprehensive) way, without propagation of errors or exceptions.
>> It's becoming confusing the more you go.
> It's probably because I'm rowing against the tide here.
-- VinÃcius dos Santos Oliveira https://vinipsmaker.github.io/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk