Andrei Alexandrescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > By the way, could optional<T> use variant<T, SomeInsipidType> as a backend?
I suggested that before. Now I think that it is not practical. It can, but it will not be optimal. I see it the other way now. I suggest that a partial specialization of variant<T, empty> be written that takes advantage of optional<T> in its implementation. I think now that the partial specialization of variant<T, empty> will satisfy the anti-pointer-like crowd. variant seems to have the right interface. Perhaps we were barking up the wrong tree? Cheers, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
