Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] generates unnessesary code for trivial types
From: Hite, Christopher (Christopher.Hite_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-02-10 10:16:49
From: Domagoj Saric <domagoj.saric_at_[hidden]>
> > Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see the justification.
> IMO it seems that, yes, you are making the same mistake as Lucanus, thinking
> about "The Universe" only as/through your POV of your personal problem domain:
> a) (optional models optionally holding an object) + (objects can be held by
> value and by reference) = optional<T&> perfectly logical
I'm really not. Give me a use case. Do they make sense being passed as
parameters/returns? Do they make sense being stored?
I just see some corner case of optional being turned into a replacement for regular
pointer.
Why not just make dumb_ptr<T>? If you want you can make it streamable and
give it clean construction.
What is it you really want from optional<T&>? Does anyone use it a lot?
Is it like std::vector<bool>?
> b) creating special cases (e.g. for T&) creates special problems in generic code
My point exactly. I'd make it work for completeness but not bother to optimize.
Chris