Nullable or Optional? Or something else?

[Rainer Deyke]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Apparently a good design is to define Optional!T with a minimum of
> member functions (ideally none) and have it use the "alias this" feature
> to masquerade as a T. That way Optional!T looks and feels much like a T,
> except that it supports a function
> 
> bool isNull(T)(Optional!T value);
> 
> Am I on the right track?

You need some syntactic way to distinguish the contained value from the
container.  Using "alias this" seems messy here.  Optional!Optional!T is
both valid and likely to occur.


-- 
Rainer Deyke - rainerd at eldwood.com