On 2023-10-19 at 12:05, Alex Rozenman via Std-Proposals wrote:
> In many cases, when it is needed to check if a container not empty,
> "size()" or "empty()" functions are used:
>
> if (vect.size() != 0) {
>
> // vector is not empty
>
> }
>
> if (!vect.empty()) {
>
> // vector is not empty
>
> }
>
>
> It seems that both variants are not expressive enough, so an explicit
> function may be required, like:
>
> if (vect.not_empty()) {
>
> // vector is not empty
>
> }
>

Could you live with if(not vect.empty()) ?

If so, that already works.



>
> In this message I would like to suggest to use of a bool casting
> operator as the most clean form of this function:
>
> if (vect) {
>
> // vector is not empty
>
> }
>

It might be "clean", but I read this as vect is a pointer that might be
null. Not obvious how this is an improvement.