From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-11 14:58:26
Yuval Ronen <ronen_yuval_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> optional<T> string_to<T>(x)
>>
>> seems more likely.
>
> Yes, looks good.
> What is the status of optional<T> w.r.t to the standard, anyway? I hope
> it's on its way...
Same old story. Write a proposal, please.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com