Re: [boost] [safebool] Can we generalize it and put it into utilities?

vicente.botet <vicente.botet <at> wanadoo.fr> writes: ... Yes, this seems much more simple and open than the mixin approach. Why do you use result instead of unspecified_bool_type. The following it enough clear to me

class Foo { ... operator safebool::unspecified_bool_type() const { return safebool(my_condition); } };

For users' sake I'd like to stay within the mainstream vocabulary. Like type, value, result, etc. Indeed, for an initiated person the "unspecified_bool_type" looks familiar. However, I still remember the what-the... feeling when I came across it first time.

I like it anyway, Vicente

Glad to hear I am not alone. Best, V.