[boost] Re: [utility] question on prior(x,n)

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-23 20:02:43

Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> | Hey!  These implementations using "advance" don't work for
>> | non-iterators (e.g. int) the way regular next() and prior() do.  I
>> | consider this a bug!
>> You're right.
>
> I don't see any need to extend the legal use of next/prior to anything
> else than iterators. 

It was already legal for non-iterators.  What made you think
otherwise?

> I considered the fact that it works/worked for
> non-iterators an accident 

It's not.  I wrote it; I meant the spec to say what it says and not
impose an iterator requirement.

> as the documentation only speaks about iterators and never bothers
> to mention non-iterators. Thus, the bug is IMHO that it's not
> explicitly documented that next/prior's first argument must meet the
> interator requirements.

Sorry, dude, I get final say on original intent, since it was mine.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com