Re: [Boost-users] [range] signature discrepancy between equal_range and upper_bound

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [range] signature discrepancy between equal_range and upper_bound
From: giecrilj_at_[hidden]
Date: 2011-12-06 15:15:42

>
>     Re: [range] signature discrepancy between equal_range and upper_bound
>
>   From: Marshall Clow <mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>
>   Reply to: boost-users_at_[hidden]
>   Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:29:34 -0800
>   Newsgroups:
>          gmane.comp.lib.boost.user
>   Followup to: newsgroup
>   References:
>          <CAKQaxCbWWuKALddDmMp4MpOCDOBOFXNpDgpJQGPAErVu7=WN4g_at_mail.gmail.
>          com>
>          <jblpnr$91o$1_at_[hidden]>
>On Dec 6, 2011, at 11:17 AM, giecrilj_at_[hidden] wrote:
>
>
>I think what the OP is saying is that in the STL, we have:
>                equal_range     ( ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last, c
>onst T& value );
>and             upper_bound     ( ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last, c
>onst T& value );
>
>but in Boost.Range, we have:
>                equal_range     ( Range &r, const T& value );
>and             upper_bound     ( Range &r, T value );
>
>And he's wondering why boost::range::upper_bound takes its' parameter by value.
>
>Is that correct?

I wonder why boost ::range ::upper_bound takes its parameter by value.

Chris