Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #7718: Basic rvalue and C++11 support (part 2)

Subject: Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #7718: Basic rvalue and C++11 support (part 2)
From: Boost C++ Libraries (noreply_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-21 12:17:25

#7718: Basic rvalue and C++11 support (part 2)
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  apolukhin     |       Owner:  ebf         
      Type:  Patches       |      Status:  reopened    
 Milestone:  Boost 1.53.0  |   Component:  variant     
   Version:  Boost 1.52.0  |    Severity:  Optimization
Resolution:                |    Keywords:              
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------

Comment (by djowel):

 To be honest, I still prefer nulling the pointer. However, people seem to
 agree that that will ultimately place a precondition on recursive_variant
 (which is not good on extremely rare cases). Me? I don't care much about
 that. IMO, it's just a matter of documentation that people should simply
 not use a moved-from object.

 The solution Peter suggested is a compromise. You do not need any asserts
 (which is present only on debug builds) and the variant's never-empty
 guarantee is not violated. If you are not happy with it, then you can
 probably ask for a vote in the Boost list. I'd personally vote for nulling
 the pointer. I'm sure many will too.

 Bottom line: Either way is fine by me. I don't care which way we choose as
 long as we don't choose the "leave it as is" route.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/7718#comment:18>
Boost C++ Libraries <http://www.boost.org/>
Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.