220 2443 <CAHOE3yd5zt91JmmeAZyLiXxQLUNGQqatX5JRRGGbZVMg-0ckEQ@mail.gmail.com> article
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals
Subject: Re: optional<T>, one more value or two states
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 19:54:41 +0000
Lines: 25
Approved: news@gmane.org
Message-ID: <CAHOE3yd5zt91JmmeAZyLiXxQLUNGQqatX5JRRGGbZVMg-0ckEQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGsORuC1ADLXgS9AZZiTo=knmhT-+9Yj+82v+b8Nq_WJpb1fOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFk2RUZyZA0LLUNuVNcnibv+qBF69jMytWQL3tkp-Kp21oEU+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGsORuB-Qkx-LaXj2jO4yLrwN524kiJONSg7oczkQZHYaJ6ASg@mail.gmail.com>
	<d360a952-28ae-4d57-bb20-96fd08725a0b@isocpp.org>
	<CAPXezF_JggyMaXjGS9r1EAGVu1NhQBEyGEXB8tKmVqgFfjoCeg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALJmx62zJd_tZ=XYL7TaSkRN6432SObwH9YS87eLX-h_pMuFYQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOHCbivAK0ypmMhrhJ3zKpF8BHu3h_rUNzeao-HnibJkC-qqGw@mail.gmail.com>
	<ef15483d-5665-4da3-9b79-aefd3c725e1b@isocpp.org>
	<CAOHCbithEUfm+w_06V71=hpkqGUJvqiyDFqD7fesfgLy4uUieg@mail.gmail.com>
	<2c2b9360-8e5e-422d-9b85-124bd947b004@isocpp.org>
	<123b9f65-12fd-4285-bb6c-cfee383d4552@isocpp.org>
	<CAHOE3yeF6KBBz7a1uw58oA3Shh_w0HFGiLtUGEd4ntJAKBauew@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA7U3HNDqV-j9wU0fw9kBwkoD6TiSmuZZhx1JCg3CNztYVMqqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHOE3yfsCHFTgcgSt+ytzqx_V5GRWrbobO5hSrd8nDQZ2NC98A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA7U3HMOQm09UYKJWCQmo34=su7LKeQyYu=2_P401CXSEE0k0A@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1359402886 7005 80.91.229.3 (28 Jan 2013 19:54:46 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 19:54:46 +0000 (UTC)
To: std-proposals@isocpp.org
Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCGPB3VVUAGBBAVPTOEAKGQEVIB4VEQ@isocpp.org Mon Jan 28 20:55:06 2013
Return-path: <std-proposals+bncBCGPB3VVUAGBBAVPTOEAKGQEVIB4VEQ@isocpp.org>
Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mail-wi0-f199.google.com ([209.85.212.199])
	by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <std-proposals+bncBCGPB3VVUAGBBAVPTOEAKGQEVIB4VEQ@isocpp.org>)
	id 1TzunE-0003PS-4t
	for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:55:00 +0100
Original-Received: by mail-wi0-f199.google.com with SMTP id hn17sf1983338wib.6
        for <gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf
         :mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results
         :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id
         :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe
         :content-type;
        bh=3FTWMVzPabbrEiuxlgu+dHhZdO63sb2i/ceMKoKFSq0=;
        b=RB5SoUU3X7+U+uGdNRFW0XeIyVwYpv02G0qT7CYq0JQa3Rnk0Qo/p7+nY2pXY5W6cg
         WgV8mOCXMaRV+jt+aK6r1ZNiGsVOwWGIozopKYkqRIGPnoDtv/ko1wjXq6JMSU9SLNpP
         hBZJyveZ5GTXeTcPl4sGoVUYHhOHHvHpYNrOfQQqwjB+bAQoupCo3YrcyFFRbhzVfmF3
         c9ZHUng73CYIpMKf2dZBXG9bAE7ZHlIHA9Ig+n9g/cnzPprcgdMbj72a9zy2SBCbdVQw
         EeknipSUchb4Rq5YBC8WhBGNNX5dyjc39aufEQglE5JqhCRet 
X-Received: by 10.180.93.134 with SMTP id cu6mr2163503wib.5.1359402882286;
        Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:42 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org
Original-Received: by 10.180.74.19 with SMTP id p19ls382538wiv.30.gmail; Mon, 28 Jan
 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.180.107.67 with SMTP id ha3mr11865791wib.2.1359402881925;
        Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.180.107.67 with SMTP id ha3mr11865788wib.2.1359402881909;
        Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
Original-Received: from mail-we0-x22e.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d6si3754366wjf.250.2013.01.28.11.54.41
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dnljms@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e;
Original-Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r6so1757698wey.19
        for <std-proposals@isocpp.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.194.88.202 with SMTP id bi10mr23408462wjb.5.1359402881814;
 Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
Original-Received: by 10.194.46.7 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAA7U3HMOQm09UYKJWCQmo34=su7LKeQyYu=2_P401CXSEE0k0A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Original-Sender: dnljms@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;       spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of dnljms@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e as permitted
 sender) smtp.mail=dnljms@gmail.com;       dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org
List-ID: <std-proposals.isocpp.org>
X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/post?hl=en>,
 <mailto:std-proposals@isocpp.org>
List-Help: <http://support.google.com/a/isocpp.org/bin/topic.py?hl=en&topic=25838>,
 <mailto:std-proposals+help@isocpp.org>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en>
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/subscribe?hl=en>,
 <mailto:std-proposals+subscribe@isocpp.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/subscribe?hl=en>,
 <mailto:googlegroups-manage+399137483710+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:2443
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals/2443>

On 28 January 2013 10:08, Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It depends on how well the range algorithms works out. They might
>> provide a more elegant way to manipulate optionals than if statements,
>> similar to how a range algorithm can be more elegant than a for loop.
>> This has worked out well in other languages, for example in Scala:
>
> Wouldn't this be better handled by a wrapper that allows optionals,
> (smart) pointers and references to be handled as ranges?
> Separation of concerns says this shouldn't be handled by optional itself.

Fair enough. I find that such separation of concerns can end up with
unwieldy interfaces, but that's a matter of opinion.

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



.