Can you clarify what you goals for optional values are. Do you want to distinguish an unset value from any other value? If the value is not set do you want it to not use any space on the wire? Do you want an older message definition (without the optional field) be compatible with a newer variation of the message (with the optional field added)?
I don't understand how C++14 / C++17 is related to this and what you mean with "experimental optional implementation". Maybe you can clarify that part.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/optional-fields-in-message/991/2) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)