Boost logo

Boost :

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-07-04 08:49:01

On 7/4/19 1:37 AM, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 3:40 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 7/3/19 7:42 PM, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
>>> Each one of these is a hodgepodge of design decisions arrived at after
>>> very, very, very long speculative discussion. That are really all just
>>> special cases of the the concept of "typesafe variant".
>> We've already had this discussion, and I'll reiterate that these types
>> are not merely special cases - they serve their specific purposes and
>> have interfaces and behavior tailored for their respective uses.
>> You could just as well say that every C++ type is a special case of a
>> typesafe variant - with only one alternative. This is as true as it is
>> useless.
> This is a straw man argument, you're refuting a gross exaggeration of
> your opponent's position.

Not at all. The types mentioned in Robert's message are very different,
so merging them into one component makes as much sense to me as the
speculation I made.

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