Daniel Wallin <dalwan01@student.umu.se> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
However, Thorsten's prodding has made me wonder if we need || for the lazy case at all. It seems as though params.has(name) ? params[name] : something_else; is superior in every way except brevity. And there will be substantial cases where it's briefer as well, because there's no need to build a function object for something_else. Am I missing something?
Yes, I think you are. We want params[name] to be a compilation error if there is no such parameter supplied by the user and no default. I don't think the proposed construct can allow that.
Duh, you're right.
IMO, a runtime error here is just not acceptable.
Okay. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com