Re: [boost] boost::algorithm::split design rational question

From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-31 17:43:03

Pavol Droba wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> There are reasons for it.
> 
> One of them is the posibility to store result in reference-like container.
> 
> Example:
> vector<iterator_range<string::iterator> > tokens;
> split(tokens, input, token_comress_off);
> 
> This way you can have a split without copying overhead. I consider
> this functionality interesting enough to make the interface to be
> like it is now.

No overhead is good, but there might be a different way to achieve it:

   split( tokens, make_iterator_range(input), ... );

We could even get away with changing split(), but letting
make_iterator_range() return a const iterator_range<T> (Erics 
suggestion).  But OTOT, that would disallow a call to mutable functions 
afterwards. We could also add make_const_iterator_range().

Anyway, I do think the current behavior can be suprising at first and 
that those who want efficiency should do the extra work (at least in C++03).

-Thorsten