Fernando Cacciola said: > Due to some significant changes to the optional<> class, I had to upload > a new version so that the review can continue based on the revised > class. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/optional.zip > > The new zip contains the new code, new test and new documentation. > > NOTE: The header optional_detail is no longer needed so you may remove > it before unpacking the zip.
Documentation issues/questions: * "its safe on most platforms which treat null pointer dereferencing as undefined behaviour which is effectively a core dump or an non-language exception" I know what you're saying here, but I don't like it. Undefined behavior is undefined behavior, and can never be considered "safe". I'm not sure how to rework it to convey what you want, but I think it needs reworked. * The "safe bool" should be documented in the same manner as it is in shared_ptr, i.e. "operator unspecified-bool-type() const; // never throws". * Does the "assert(*opt == v)" in the description for "explicit optional<T>::optional( T const& v )" indicate that the type T must be comparable? (I know the documentation clearly says otherwise, but it's not clear that this is a non-normative part of the documentation.) * In the acknowledgements for Gennadiy Rozental you describe the "value based" implementation which no longer exists. Interface issues/questions: * Is there a reason for operator!() when we have the safe bool? * Should you provide a templated assignment to parallel the templated constructor? William E. Kempf _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
