Question about get_ref()

[dariomt]

I see there were some discussions about adding get_ref(), but I can't see it in the code.
What happened to get_ref()?

I believe that having get_ref() is convenient and safe. It could merely call get_ptr() and throw if it returns nullptr. It makes it easier to traverse a json object when I'm pretty sure about the types it holds. Otherwise I have to constantly check against nullptr myself.

I'd like the following code to work seamlessly:

void func(const std::string&);
json value = "foobar";
func( value.get_ref<const std::string>() );

Currently I'd have to write the following:

void func(const std::string&);
json value = "foobar";
auto p = value.get_ptr<const std::string*>();
if (!p) throw some_exception;
func( *p );

Would you accept a PR for this functionality?

[nlohmann]

After a getter for a value and a pointer I did not follow to implement get_ref. But I would be glad to have a PR for that.

[dariomt]

I'll try to provide a PR including tests and docs.

One question: what would be the preferred form?
get_ref<const std::string>()
or
get_ref<const std::string &>()

To me get_ref is enough to convey that we get a reference, the & in the template parameter is redundant (I feel the same way about the * required by get_ptr by the way).

[dariomt]

I have this ready in my branch get_ref.
But I have created that branch off my master where I have all my other PRs already merged.
Do you know how I can produce a PR with only the actual changes done in my branch?

[nlohmann]

Hi @dariomt, sorry for not answering earlier.

As for your first question: I would prefer get_ref<const std::string &> - it makes the getting of a reference explicit.

For your second question, I unfortunately have no answer.

[nlohmann]

Any news here?

[dariomt]

My changes already implemented get_ref<const std::string &>, so that's good.

However, I'm still trying to get the branch in proper shape to make the PR easy for you, git newbie here :)

[nlohmann]

Ok - looking forward to it!

[nlohmann]

@dariomt - any news on this?

[dariomt]

Sorry, I haven't had time to look into this.
I should have time this week.

[dariomt]

PR ready!
I think I've merged everything correctly.

[nlohmann]

Thanks @dariomt for the good job!