Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 15:58:12 +0000
On Tue, 28 Oct 2025 at 15:04, Pavel Vazharov via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 4:46 PM Nikl Kelbon via Std-Proposals <
> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the links, but I don't see any discussion of this particular
> idea there. Instead, they're discussing allocating the value on the heap or
> doubling the buffer.0308
> The first sentence in the https://wg21.link/P0308 says
> This paper argues in section III that when variant's contained types have
> noexcept move constructors, variant *shall* *never* be valueless, that
> is, the specification should *statically* guarantee that
> valueless_by_exception() will *never* return true.
>
>
Ah yes, but you see that paper didn't discuss the possibility of "just make
it work for all types by using magic" ;-)
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 4:46 PM Nikl Kelbon via Std-Proposals <
> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the links, but I don't see any discussion of this particular
> idea there. Instead, they're discussing allocating the value on the heap or
> doubling the buffer.0308
> The first sentence in the https://wg21.link/P0308 says
> This paper argues in section III that when variant's contained types have
> noexcept move constructors, variant *shall* *never* be valueless, that
> is, the specification should *statically* guarantee that
> valueless_by_exception() will *never* return true.
>
>
Ah yes, but you see that paper didn't discuss the possibility of "just make
it work for all types by using magic" ;-)
Received on 2025-10-28 15:58:31
