220 18760 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Nevin Liber Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Compressing std::optional Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 20:47:18 -0500 Lines: 89 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <4359ebfb-5e20-42c1-84a0-16ef6201db33@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3bad813f8e105194dd026 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435196886 16969 80.91.229.3 (25 Jun 2015 01:48:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 01:48:06 +0000 (UTC) To: "std-proposals@isocpp.org" Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCE35H5S6IDBBTV3VWWAKGQEY7HOYNA@isocpp.org Thu Jun 25 03:48:02 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-wg0-f71.google.com ([74.125.82.71]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7wGl-0002wn-Sw for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 03:47:59 +0200 Original-Received: by wgbhy7 with SMTP id hy7sf15096918wgb.3 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:content-type:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=ZVuvBLXkSRwHCcvNdCuHZdOKcnZrK2Gu9to4nrbDK0s=; b=YEU9IY7l2777KMWedyPiNqks1u9X6vUX+m6giXaRXnPrbIEA/2VE9UmAwg39TTOVJo UpW6ZLvK2URbp7UGOmyQ/cT4Gft4Pr6u+CLIZtAm2V/TCuGA71oUyF8tLIOhYYxIkFI2 81xDTYqAiF2uecGoaq3XAgaLxThOpZ1ArI9H1PKVmbuex2rVVf1p5XqmFBWenegH24oM a0eTI7pE15KWfi+LL+AOwoN9tlkIoeuComQ4nmr2k/mgSbhggTNxgQIJmE5giSRaG6mR +B5uz4Qthibxkqx5TocTiq5pMbCwGjBj4nCFfIVIIlVkbqL4j0xGXADCQrrinWPNeKTe J8Kw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl7SgN5lVnP6yV8/g7SYTbQkw57fBXR2BQpp6sZCFqg8aggPh/5cM7rJyaC3Pd8zsrwKBez X-Received: by 10.113.11.3 with SMTP id ee3mr38080552lbd.9.1435196879368; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:59 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.180.94.202 with SMTP id de10ls527229wib.6.gmail; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.109.136 with SMTP id hs8mr1025846wib.73.1435196878237; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id eu3si5920397wic.47.2015.06.24.18.47.58 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nliber@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f; Original-Received: by wgqq4 with SMTP id q4so50073428wgq.1 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.222.230 with SMTP id qp6mr76284846wjc.70.1435196877697; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:57 -0700 (PDT) Original-Sender: nliber@gmail.com Original-Received: by 10.194.16.41 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:47:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: nevin@eviloverlord.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nliber@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nliber@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: X-Spam-Checked-In-Group: std-proposals@isocpp.org X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:18760 Archived-At: --001a11c3bad813f8e105194dd026 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 24 June 2015 at 17:58, 'Jeffrey Yasskin' via ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals wrote: > I'd be happy to see a paper fleshing this out. I don't think anyone > was opposed to the idea, but it would have slowed down the initial > optional<> proposal if it had been included. Ahem. I was strongly against it when it came up on this list two years ago, and I'm still strongly against it now. This could be slightly tapered by proposing a separate type instead of shoehorning it into optional. If it were to be shoehorned into optional, I'd be strongly against optional going into C++17, and that would make me sad. Either way, I believe that it would take a *significant* amount of committee time to discuss. You have to revisit every issue that optional and variant touched, including the issues with the empty state of variant, because now you may not be able to no throw construct the disengaged state. All this for a type that is so important yet hasn't been implemented by the people claiming it is so important. It isn't fair to encourage someone to write up a paper and fly to Kona if we aren't going to spend enough time to give useful feedback. Do you really think we'll have that light a load in Kona? -- Nevin ":-)" Liber (847) 691-1404 -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. --001a11c3bad813f8e105194dd026 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 24 June 2015 at 17:58, 'Jeffrey Yasskin' via IS= O C++ Standard - Future Proposals <std-proposals@isocpp.org>= wrote:
I'd be happy to see a paper fleshing this o= ut. I don't think anyone
was opposed to the idea, but it would have slowed down the initial
optional<> proposal if it had been included.

Ahem.=C2=A0 I was strongly against it when it came up on this list= two years ago, and I'm still strongly against it now.=C2=A0 This could= be slightly tapered by proposing a separate type instead of shoehorning it= into optional.=C2=A0 If it were to be shoehorned into optional, I'd be= strongly against optional going into C++17, and that would make me sad.

Either way, I believe that it would take a signif= icant amount of committee time to discuss.=C2=A0 You have to revisit ev= ery issue that optional and variant touched, including the issues with the = empty state of variant, because now you may not be able to no throw constru= ct the disengaged state.=C2=A0 All this for a type that is so important yet= hasn't been implemented by the people claiming it is so important.

It isn't fair to encourage someone to write up a = paper and fly to Kona if we aren't going to spend enough time to give u= seful feedback.=C2=A0 Do you really think we'll have that light a load = in Kona?
--
=C2=A0Nevin "= ;:-)" Liber=C2=A0 <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com>=C2=A0 (847) 691-1404

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
--001a11c3bad813f8e105194dd026-- .