Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] memory use for optional refs and ptrs
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jhellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-05 12:09:38
On 10/5/2010 8:57 AM, Fernando Cacciola wrote:
[...]
> optional<> cannot decide *by itslef* that a particular value happens to
> be equivalent to an uninitialized state. That is, a null pointer is not
> neccesarily the same as none. This is particulary true in a generic
> design when the type wrapped is unconstrained (i.e. T can be anything,
> including a pointer) and the condition of uninitialized state *must* be
> strict (i.e. not *any* value being given)
What about "null references"?
- Jeff