Re: [boost] Re: [boost.range] late addition, votes needed

From: Pavol Droba (droba_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-15 15:00:28

On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:35:11PM -0500, Doug Gregor wrote:
> 
> On Sep 15, 2004, at 1:09 PM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> 
> >"Doug Gregor" <dgregor_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> >news:DD33A4E0-0733-11D9-8C97-000A95B0EC64_at_cs.indiana.edu...
> >|
> >| On Sep 15, 2004, at 10:09 AM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> >
> >| > Given the framework in boost.range these would be absolutely 
> >*trivial*
> >| > to add.
> >| >
> >| > 1st vote: for or against adding these?
> >|
> >| Against. If the C++ committee likes them, we can add them into a 
> >later
> >| revision of Boost.
> >
> >Ok, but doesn't it usually work the way that things go into boost 
> >first? If
> >not for anything else, then to
> >see if the stuff works in practice?
> 
> cbegin()/cend() aren't all that useful unless they also work with the 
> standard library containers. If it's never going to happen for the 
> standard containers, why bother putting it into Boost? Something like 
> "as_const(c)" is a totally different story, of course.
> 

Are you sure about this? What about:

template<typename ContainerT>
typename ContainerT::const_iterator const_begin(const ContainerT& C)
{
   return C.begin();
}

This should do exactly what we want.

To sumarize, I like the idea of const_begin()/end() in this wording.

Regards,

Pavol