Subject: Re: [std-proposals] P0323 std::expected - void value type?
From: Ville Voutilainen (ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-10-05 11:06:13
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 19:03, Bjorn Reese via Std-Proposals
> On 2020-10-05 17:41, Emile Cormier via Std-Proposals wrote:
> > If C/C++ had been designed with void being an empty monostate value
> > type, I guess we wouldn't have all this trouble of treating void as a
> > special case in generic programming. Libraries wouldn't have needed to
> > invent their own "nothing" types like nullopt_t or monostate_t.
> There has been some work in that direction, but I do not know the
> current state:
The newest fun thought I have about that paper is that it changes what
void is, but doesn't
replace void's current abilities. Like being able to say "I really
don't have a value that I can produce,
please treat attempts to think otherwise as errors".
STD-PROPOSALS list run by firstname.lastname@example.org
Standard Proposals Archives on Google Groups