Re: [boost] [outcome v2] Please comment on new result<T, EC> reference API docs

...

Do I need to write more detail for the APIs, or is what is there enough?

You could be more detailed in places. For example,

"" Function template outcome::policy::throw_directly::narrow_value_check

template <class Impl> static constexpr void narrow_value_check(Impl* self) noexcept;

Performs a narrow check of state, used in the assume_value() functions ""

You have to say what happens, that is, you're missing the Effects clause here.

Great point.

Another minor comment:

noexcept(noexcept(value_type(std::forward<T>(t)))&&noexcept(error_type(std::forward<U>(u))));

This is usually written as

noexcept(is_nothrow_constructible_v && is_nothrow_constructible_v);

I was trying to work around an ICE on MSVC :( But it's not working, so I'm putting it back to how you describe.

If you haven't, you could look at the C++ standard to get an idea of how it specifies things, for example here: http://eel.is/c++draft/tuple.tuple

SmartPtr uses a similar style too, f.ex. here:

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/develop/libs/smart_ptr/doc/html/smart_ptr.html...

I find writing this overspecification highly unnatural to me. It's not how I think about APIs at all. Thanks for your feedback Peter. Good to know this sort of documentation is what people want. I'll keep pressing onwards. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/