Hi, The STL has an implementation of std::map. It has some designs drawbacks in my opinion. For example, the fact that T2 has to have a default copy constructor. Even if for T2, by design, doesn't make sense to have a copy constructor. The problem boils down to the fact that, in the STL design, if an key element of the map is referenced with the operator[] and it doesn't exist then an 'empty' (default) object T2 is created. In my opinion this feature is independent of the other features of a map. For example if the element doesn't exists and the context is not assignment then it could give an exception. One option would be to use std::map. But I am not sure if that creates other problems. It at least creates the problem of having to access elements with the ugly syntax (*m[key]) The question is, does boost have another more complete solution for this problem? (something that I would call optional_map, uninitializing_map, elegant_map) Thank you, Alfredo BTW, This is a simple implementation that I imagine, although in my opinion a clever implementation does not even need to use the indirection of boost::optional, because the context of assigment m[key]=val can be detected with template expressions, and only the copy constructor is needed in this case. (code not tested) template class optional_map : protected std::map{ typedef std::map base; public: using std::map::size; using std::map::empty; T2& operator[](T1 const& key){return *base::operator[](key);} T2 const& operator[](T1 const& key) const{return *base::operator[] (key);} };