StackOverflow2013

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals

PO
primarykey
Id
13875994
data
AcceptedAnswerId
0
AnswerCount
0
ClosedDate
CommentCount
0
CommunityOwnedDate
CreationDate
2012-12-14T09:36:55.613
FavoriteCount
0
LastActivityDate
2012-12-14T09:36:55.613
LastEditDate
LastEditorUserId
0
OwnerUserId
838509
ParentId
13874673
PostTypeId
2
Score
5
ViewCount
0
LastEditorDisplayName
text
Body
You have already provided a solution which looks sound. I understand that the question is "How do you feel?" My personal feeling is that there need to exist some balance between safety and unambiguity on the one hand and the simplicity of the code on the other. It looks like your solution may be pushing it too hard towards safety and compromising the simplicity too much. Whenever I used containers holding "weak references" I used raw pointers to represent these. True, this might make it less clear who the owner of the object is, but it has some advantages too: you do not have to study what a "reference_wrapper" is, and the code is clear. If you use them (a container of weak references) only temporarily and you encapsulate this usage, the ownership issue should be minimal. But this is just a question of personal preference, I guess. Let me just propose using different types for the same purpose. This is provided that you can afford to use Boost. For "strong" references (which own the resource) you could use Steve Watanabe's <a href="http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/doc/html/index.html">Type Erasure</a> library. It does not require an explicit usage of free-store memory, and i suppose for small types it can get away from using heap-memory altogether (using small-buffer optimization). It has been recently accepted to Boost, although has not been release yet, I think. For weak references, consider using "optional references" with Boost.Optional: <pre><code>int i = 0; boost::optional<int&> oi = i; // note: int& i = 2; assert(*oi == 2); </code></pre> It has same semantics as reference_wrapper. 
Tags
Title
singulars
PostAcceptedAnswerId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostParentId
1. POstd::reference_wrapper<T> usage in a container
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTQuestion
PostTypePostTypeId
1. PTAnswer
UserLastEditorUserId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
UserOwnerUserId
1. USAndrzej
plurals
PostLinksPostIdRelatedPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostLinksRelatedPostIdPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostsAcceptedAnswerId
1. POstd::reference_wrapper<T> usage in a container
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTQuestion
PostsParentIdCreationDate
1. This table or related slice is empty.
VotesPostIdCreationDate
1. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTUpMod
2. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTUpMod
3. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTAcceptedByOriginator
CommentsPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.

Querying!

Guidance

A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.