Hi,
Are you sure you want to do a copy-assignment of your T? Your example would typically be more efficient when doing a move-assignment or a swap instead. What would you think of an optional<T>::swap_if_initialized member function, so that you can do:
if( ! TryToGetT().swap_if_initialized(t) { ... other way to get t ... }
I like a swap much better, thanks Neil! I'm normally against obscure functions that are meant to save a few keystrokes. OTOH, while the verbose alternative is perfectly clear and I wouldn't even consider searching for a shortcut, this particular shortcut looks clear enough to justify it. So, Arno: don't you agree swap is better? If so, does the swap() method really need the "_if_initialized"? I would just add overloads to the existing swap: bool optional<T>::swap(T& a) bool swap( optional<T> const&x, T& y ) ; bool swap( T const&x, optional<T> const& y ) ; I know 'swap' is a big name, but distorting it with a return value doesn't seem disruptive enough to justify choosing a different name. What do people think? -- Fernando Cacciola SciSoft Consulting http://www.scisoft-consulting.com