5 Oct
2010
5 Oct
'10
4:09 p.m.
On 10/5/2010 8:57 AM, Fernando Cacciola wrote: [...]
optional<> cannot decide *by itslef* that a particular value happens to be equivalent to an uninitialized state. That is, a null pointer is not neccesarily the same as none. This is particulary true in a generic design when the type wrapped is unconstrained (i.e. T can be anything, including a pointer) and the condition of uninitialized state *must* be strict (i.e. not *any* value being given)
What about "null references"? - Jeff