[section A note about optional] `optional` should be used with special caution and consideration. First, it is functionally similar to a tristate boolean (false, maybe, true) —such as __BOOST_TRIBOOL__— except that in a tristate boolean, the maybe state [_represents a valid value], unlike the corresponding state of an uninitialized `optional`. It should be carefully considered if an `optional` instead of a `tribool` is really needed. Second, although `optional<>` provides a contextual conversion to `bool` in C++11, this falls back to an implicit conversion on older compilers. This conversion refers to the initialization state and not to the contained value. Using `optional` can lead to subtle errors due to the implicit `bool` conversion: void foo ( bool v ) ; void bar() { optional v = try(); // The following intended to pass the value of 'v' to foo(): foo(v); // But instead, the initialization state is passed // due to a typo: it should have been foo(*v). } The only implicit conversion is to `bool`, and it is safe in the sense that typical integral promotions don't apply (i.e. if `foo()` takes an `int` instead, it won't compile). Third, mixed comparisons with `bool` work differently than similar mixed comparisons between pointers and `bool`, so the results might surprise you: optional oEmpty(none), oTrue(true), oFalse(false); if (oEmpty == none); // renders true if (oEmpty == false); // renders false! if (oEmpty == true); // renders false! if (oFalse == none); // renders false if (oFalse == false); // renders true! if (oFalse == true); // renders false if (oTrue == none); // renders false if (oTrue == false); // renders false if (oTrue == true); // renders true In other words, for `optional<>`, the following assertion does not hold: assert((opt == false) == (!opt)); [endsect]