Subtle C++ Compiler Error with std::optional and the Conditional Operator -- Giovanni Dicanio
An example of writing clear code with good intention, but getting an unexpected C++ compiler error:
Subtle C++ Compiler Error with std::optional and the Conditional Operator
by Giovanni Dicanio
From the article:
I was asked: “What’s the problem here? Are there limitations of using the {} syntax to specify nothing?”
This is a good question. So, clearly, the C++ compiler didn’t interpret the {} syntax as a way to default-initialize the std::optional in case the string was not empty (i.e. the second “branch” in the conditional ternary operator).
A first step to help the C++ compiler figuring out the programmer’s intention could be to be more explicit. So, instead of using {}, you can try and use the std::nullopt constant, which represents an optional that doesn’t store any value. [...]
[...]
P.S. I’m not a C++ “language lawyer”, but it would be great if the C++ language could be extended to allow the original simple code to just work.
In the world of C++, the concept of object lifetime and 
A new episode of the series about SObjectizer and message passing:
Writing efficient code is challenging but worthwhile. Andrew Drakeford demonstrates how SIMD (Single Instruction Multiple Data) can reduce your carbon footprint.
A new episode of the series about SObjectizer and message passing:
In this article, we’ll explore six practical string processing operations introduced in C++20 and C++23. These features represent an evolution in this crucial area, covering a spectrum of operations from searching and appending to creation and stream handling.
