Niall Douglas wrote:
Get some experience programming in Rust and come back to me.
This is a very generous offer, which I'm afraid I have to decline at present.
I think you'll realise that monadic programming is going to become huge in C++ 11/14 in the near future in those use case scenarios where it is far better than all other idioms.
With that qualification this statement is trivial, isn't it? My point was that there do exist other scenarios, where monadic programming of this particular expected<> variety is not at all far better than other idioms. Either way, consider my message a naming suggestion for the bikeshedding session. My naming suggestion is that your type is properly called future<expected<T, error_code>>. This name in no way prevents you from going all monadic on our posteriors. :-)