Andrzej Krzemieński
Andrzej Krzemieński
I could make this a long term goal. For now, note that you can wrap `boost::optional` or `std::experimental` optional into `compact_optional`. This way, you can get a uniform (but not...
Thank you for your interest in the library. I am sorry it took so long for me to reply. If I were to repeat your suggestion with my own words,...
Ok, I can see the direction you want to go. I think it is incompatible with the design criteria of this library: to make every intention of the user explicit,...
It is just not clear what should happen in the following situation: ``` struct Tool { Tool(int); // ctor 1 Tool(optional); // ctor 2 }; optional oi = 1; optional...
I do not know. I think I will rise this to the community and let other people speak. This looks like something that might become a controversial issue.
See this discussion: https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/topic/std-proposals/RTUK2xO0tzs/discussion
Can we see the minimal code and the error message?
Hi, License-wise, If you retain the original copyright notice, you are fine. This implementation does allow optional references, but makes arbitrary decisions how to handle them. For instance assignment from...
2015-11-03 17:15 GMT+01:00 Johannes Laire [email protected]: > Optional is awesome and I'd like to return an optional from a > constexpr function. The following function compiles with g++ 5.2.0, but...
I am not sure if it helps anything in practice, but you can return non-moveable types by value with a bit of effort: ``` c++ #include struct Guard { int...