The following is a sketch of a potential use case for the newly-accepted and
already very useful 'optional' class.
Suppose you have a pure RAII guard/locker which unconditionally does its
job:
struct RAII_lock
: boost::noncopyable
{
RAII_lock(entity& e);
~RAII_lock();
};
and you want to write a semantic equivalent to the following
boost::scoped_ptr<RAII_lock> lock( cond ? new RAII_lock(entity) : 0 );
// ...
expect for the dynamic allocation part. How would you do it?
IMO the following seems only natural:
boost::optional<RAII_lock> lock( cond, entity );
// ...
The only problem with the above is that currently you cannot write something
like this. It would be nice if we could, IMO.
Thoughts?
Aleksey
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
