Re: [boost] [variant2] Andrzej's review

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 7:47 PM Vinnie Falco via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 5:35 PM Andrzej Krzemienski via Boost wrote:

...

The main (and only) reason for rejection is the never-empty basic exception-safety guarantee offered and endorsed by the library.

If I want/need a variant that offers the never-empty basic guarantee then Boost should not provide it?

Maybe? How many variants should Boost provide (and I'm not asking that facetiously)? These tradeoffs are not the ones I would make. There are two other variants I would rather use in different circumstances: - Strong exception safety - Strong performance (never fall back on noexcept move or double buffering to avoid a possible exception) I don't know how to vote for this. The design tradeoffs Peter is making are certainly reasonable ones, but they don't cover the things I do with variant. I would just fall back on using std::variant over the tradeoffs being made here. -- Nevin ":-)" Liber > +1-847-691-1404