|
Boost Users : |
Subject: [Boost-users] [optional]
From: dariomt_at_[hidden]
Date: 2009-05-06 04:51:40
Hi list,
In 'classic' C++ style I have signalled optional parameters in a function
with pointers that might be null (I wouldn't like to create overloads for
all possible combination of existing and non-existing parameters) e.g.
// p1 is mandatory, p2, p3 and p4 are optional
void f(const Param1& p1, const Param2* p2, const Param3* p3, const Param4*
p4);
And call it
Param1p1; Param2 p2; Param4 p4;
f(p1, &p2, 0, &p4);
I thought I could use boost::optional like this
void f(const Param1& p1, const boost::optional<Param2> & p2, const
boost::optional<Param3> p3, const boost::optional<Param4> & p4);
And call it
Param1p1; Param2 p2; Param4 p4;
f(p1, boost::optional<Param2>(p2), boost::optional<Param3>(),
boost::optional<Param4>(p4) );
but I haven't seen this usage in the examples in the documentation of
Boost.Optional.
Is this usage correct? Are there any hidden drawbacks with this approach?
TIA
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net