Re: [boost] [variant2] documentation request

Subject: Re: [boost] [variant2] documentation request
From: Gottlob Frege (gottlobfrege_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-03-03 06:41:33

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 1:20 PM Peter Dimov via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Niall Douglas wrote:
> > > It so happens that the strong guarantee is unachievable with variant
> > > (without too much double buffering.) You can either have basic, or
> > > noexcept.
> >
> > You surprise me, given this is a design capable of double buffering.
> >
> > For a variant2<A, B>, where both A and B have throwing move constructors
> > and assignment, surely if the variant has state A in buffer1, setting it
> > to state B would use buffer2. If B throws during move, we simply don't
> > change the currently selected buffer to buffer2. The variant's A state
> > remains untouched i.e. strong guarantee.
> >
> > I guess you haven't written out anywhere how and when the double buffering
> > comes into play.
>
> That is actually the one thing I have written, twice, once in the README and
> one in the Overview section of the documentation. :-)
>
> "To avoid going into a valueless-by-exception state, this implementation
> falls back to using double storage unless
>
> * one of the alternatives is the type monostate,
> * one of the alternatives has a nonthrowing default constructor, or
> * all the contained types are nothrow move constructible."
>
> So, yes, variant<A, B> will be double-buffered, but variant<monostate, A, B>
> and variant<int, A, B> won't be.
>
>

For variant<int, short>, can I assign a T that has an operator int()?
Is assignment templatized?

What happens with

struct Bad
{
    operator int() { throw false; }
};

variant<int, short> v = (short)10;
v = Bad();