Re: [Boost-users] [optional]

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [optional]
From: dariomt (dariomt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-06 12:30:07

Roman Perepelitsa <roman.perepelitsa <at> gmail.com> writes:

> 
> 2009/5/6 Roman Perepelitsa <roman.perepelitsa <at> gmail.com>
> It's less efficient, because all arguments will be copied. It's also more
typing, longer compilation times and more code generated. 
> 
> 
> There is one more caveat. This approach does not work with polymorphic types
(you'll get slicing). I don't think there are any advantages in passing
boost::optional<T> compared to const T*.Roman Perepelitsa.
> 
> 

Thanks for the answer!

Is there a way to avoid the copy (and thus the slicing)? Perhaps using
boost::optional<T&> or boost::optional< boost::reference_wrapper<T> > ?