"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joel de Guzman wrote: >> David Abrahams wrote: >> >>> BTW, I just realized that a conversion from variant<T> to optional<T> >>> could be used to do extraction as well. Maybe it would be better to >>> ditch extract altogether and just use optional? >> >> I think this makes sense. The disadvantage is the overhead of optional >> just to do "extract"ion. > > That means an extra copy
Really? You can't convert to an optional<T&>? > and inability to change that data held in the variant using > non-const extract. Same question applies. > If we really need to go that route, it's probably better to just > make extract return a value. I'm confused. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost