Subject: Re: [boost] compact_optional -- prompting interest
From: David Stone (david_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-09-27 22:52:21
Matt, I think the use case you describe is more suited to the
easily-specializable optional I described in the other thread (although I
do prefer the interface described by AgustÃn K-ballo Bergé, I will have to
look into this some more). You have a type that can always have a special
compressed optional representation. I believe that compact_optional's use
case is that in this particular case, the value of "17" is not valid and is
being used as a sentinel, but it's nothing intrinsic to the type, it has to
do with the usage of type.