On 10/5/2010 11:27 AM, Christian Holmquist wrote:
On 5 October 2010 12:55, Fernando Cacciola<fernando.cacciola@gmail.com>wrote:
On 05/10/2010 01:09 p.m., Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
What about "null references"? What about it? It's convenient to pass optional values as pointers, even though one would much prefer passing them as optional references.
void foo(Data* output) // no way to tell if implementation supports the output to be null void foo(optional<Data&> output) // clearly the intention is that the output is optional, and that the implementation is responsible for checking if output is assigned by caller or not
optional<T&> could unless I'm mistaken remove the member boolean, since there is no such thing as a null reference.
That about it. - Jeff