Re: [optional] Feedback on the range interface for Boost.Optional

From: Thomas Fowlery (thomas.fowlery.yes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-09-14 11:58:52

Every feature should be well motivated by a real use case or a set of use
cases. I don't find any of the examples in this proposal motivating. In
fact, this feature seems to encourage bad code, judging by the examples:
- using transform(f) | join with an optional-returning function f, instead
of using a simple filter(predicate)
- materializing optionals when not really necessary (incurs extra
moves/copies)
- abusing the range-for loop for unwrapping optionals

Best regards,
Thomas