From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-29 18:04:39
Jeff Garland wrote:
> And to be clear -- I was just illustrating an example that I don't
> consider to be a 'nice to have' for a newer version of c++. There are
> certainly others....
There are certainly others, and in every case I think that the right thing
to do is along the same lines. This is sometimes relatively trivial, as with
string_view, sometimes hard, as with taking error_code& or returning an
optional.
Note how we don't have this issue at all with boost::function - that's
because it already takes everything, including std::function, so interop
mostly just works. A library that takes a boost::function in its interface
is usable as-is from C++17 client code.