From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-05 09:40:59
Jeff Garland wrote:
> Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>> Steve Hutton wrote:
>>> In summary I think that our 2.2 release with iterator support will be
>>> very close to what you have sketched out here, with the exception of
>>> boost::optional integraton, which I think we can address in a
>>> boostified version of SOCI, post 2.2.
>> Steve,
>>
>> Yes, I agree it's a very interesting idea, the boost::optional.
>> I second it to post 2.2.
>
> While I agree consideration of null handling using optional makes sense, there
> has been some controversy in the past about the optional interface...so be
> aware that this approach may bring criticism from some people.
What better way is there of specifying a database null value being
passed to or returned from a column of a particular row other than to
use boost::optional is the key question. I believe the criticism of
optional in the past regards using it with optional references, but when
passing and returning database null values, only values would normally
be used.