Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [variant2] Need rationale for never-empty guarantee
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-03-02 05:03:54

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 8:55 PM Andrzej Krzemienski via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 2. this state is actually read instead of being destroyed (or overwritten)

Why does it have to be read instead of destroyed? The reason why
valid-but-unspecified is useful is not because reading it is somehow
desirable, but because it could happen. It's better than seeing pink

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