From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-09 14:22:30
hartmutkaiser_at_[hidden] (Hartmut Kaiser) writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> > Completely relying on MOJO or similar techniques would
>> require, that
>> > I'm able/allowed to _modify_ the base iterator code, which isn't
>> > always true.
>> I'm not talking about relying on MOJO, I'm talking about
>> andrei's finding that on compilers that elide copies, passing
>> objects by reference if they're just going to be copied
>> anyway is almost always a mistake.
> Sorry, I've misunderstood.
> It seems to me, that Andrei wrote his 'Lying const' statements under the
> strong impression, that ZUTO would work as expected. But AFAIR ZUTO never
> worked as envisioned and therefor MOJO was developed. But I'm not pushing
> you to use a const reference, it was merely a question to understand the
> rationale behind this design decision.
I don't feel pushed. I would like to do it, and have only one small
reservation. If you could clear that matter up definitively I'd be
very happy to make the change.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk