Subject: Re: [boost] [variant2] Need rationale for never-empty guarantee
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-03-02 22:42:52
Gottlob Frege wrote:
> The code might say that, but the compiler probably still turns it into a
> switch.
Narrator: But it didn't turn it into a switch.
(There's no need to speculate nowadays when we have Compiler Explorer.)