Subject: Re: [boost] [variant2] Need rationale for never-empty guarantee
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-03-02 19:47:43
On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 at 09:59, Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Kind of, but as written this implies that std::variant has no costs, which
> is not true. The checks for valueless do carry a cost. Each visit(), for
> example, starts with `if(valueless) throw`, which is not necessary in
That is not true.
A typical implementation would just add an extra value to the switch, there
is no extra branch.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk