Re: [Boost-users] [review][LEAF] Review of LEAF

On 31/05/2020 00:43, Emil Dotchevski via Boost-users wrote:

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:28 PM Sorin Fetche via Boost-users mailto:boost-users@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...

Excellent as it allows bridging multiple error handling strategies and usage patterns in an efficient way. I view it as a clear successor to Boost.Exception and has very good interoperability with Boost.Outcome.

Thanks for highlighting this. Indeed, you can use outcome::result<> instead of leaf::result<>, and still use LEAF to handle errors; it does not have to replace any library already in use, it could be deployed surgically in a large code base, to get error objects transported in a tricky case or two.

I should add that those who use Experimental Outcome do so because status_code can transport arbitrary payload in the result's E type. If the payload is non-trivial, a common strategy is to store it in a singleton, and pass a unique identifier to that item in the singleton in the payload. This is not dissimilar to the technique which LEAF provides. Niall