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

From: Steve Downey (sdowney_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-09-16 11:44:15

Making ADL findable begin/end is sufficient to make something a range for
std::ranges::range purposes, but I'm not sure what that saves you over
adding them to the member interface? The implementation is slightly cleaner
then?

Note that you do not have to add a base class or mixin to optional, just
the begin/end const and non-const functions.

On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 3:25 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 9/15/24 20:55, Andrzej Krzemienski via Boost wrote:
> >
> > The usages for the interop with ranges were given, but it looks like
> there
> > are no other usages not involving ranges.
>
> I'm not familiar with ranges, but is there an integration layer that
> would allow std::/boost::optional plug into the ranges infrastructure
> without modification? Some sort of traits that could be specialized or
> ADL-found free functions?
>
> For example, we could provide begin()/end() overloads for boost::optional.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>