In an answer to
What is the equivalent of boost::variant in the C++ standard library?
it is mentioned that boost::variant
and std::variant
differ somewhat.
- What are the differences, as far as someone using these classes is concerned?
- What motivation did the committee express to adopt
std::variant
with these differences?
- What should I watch out for when coding with either of these, to maintain maximum compatibility with switching to the other one?
(the motivation is using boost::variant
in pre-C++17 code)
It seems the main point of contention regarding the design of a variant class has been what should happen when an assignment to the variant, which should upon completion destory the old value, throws an exception:
variant<std::string, MyClassWithThrowingDefaultCtor> v = "ABC";
v = MyClassWithThrowingDefaultCtor();
The options seem to be:
- Prevent this by restricting the possible representable types to nothrow-move-constructible ones.
- Keep the old value - but this requires double-buffers (which is what
boost::variant
does apparently).
- Have a 'disengaged' state with no value for each variant, and go to that state on such failures.
- Undefined behavior
- Make the variant throw when trying to read its value after something like that happens
and if I'm not mistaken, the latter is what's been accepted.
This is summarized from the ISO C++ blog post by Axel Naumann from Nov 2015.