On 2014-02-03 17:33, Edward Diener wrote:
On 2/3/2014 10:03 AM, Roland Bock wrote:
On 2014-02-03 14:50, Bjorn Reese wrote:
Table columns have a _can_be_null option. How about handling this implicitly by declaring the _value_type be a boost::optional type?
Hi Bjorn,
I thought about using boost::optional for some time, but decided against it for the time being.
In most usecases I encountered so far, it is totally OK to interpret NULL values like default values, e.g. NULL strings and empty strings, or NULL foreign keys or 0LL. For those usecases it would be quite annoying to have to check if there really is a value, or always use get_optional_value_or...
You are wrong ! Having a database NULL value is completely different from having an empty string or a 0 value. Please reconsider. The boost::optional is the correct choice.
Edward, after a short night's sleep I drafted a document for how sqlpp11 could cover both use cases: 1. NULL is NULL and nothing else, dammit! 2. NULL or 0? Sometimes I just don't care. https://github.com/rbock/sqlpp11/wiki/NULL Please let me know what you think. Regards, Roland