13 Dec
2013
13 Dec
'13
12:31 a.m.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Eric Niebler
On 12/12/2013 9:35 AM, Matt Calabrese wrote:
A little hackish, but:
template< class T, int = 0, class S > boost::optional<T> lexical_cast( S const&, std::nothrow_t );
Is that even legal?! A non-defaulted template parameter after a defaulted one? <boggle> How will this fare on older compilers, I wonder.
Yeah. I think it's worked on GCC and Clang ever since they've supported defaults for function template parameters, but I could be mistaken. I don't know about other compilers. -- -Matt Calabrese