On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Robert Jones <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:robertgbjones@gmail.com" target="_blank">robertgbjones@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Ah, now I&#39;m understanding your point better. You&#39;re postulating a version
<div>of for_each which requires copy and assign, just for the purpose of exposition.</div><div><br></div><div>Got it, thx!</div><div><br></div><div>Boost.Range sliced does its slicing by calculating iterator offsets from the</div>


<div>begin and end of its source range, which is why it needs random access iterators.</div><div>Its iterator type is also hardwired to be the iterator type of its source range.</div><div><br></div><div>Frankly I do wonder at wisdom of some its design decisions.</div>


<div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Me too! It was certainly a version which worked and at the time I hadn&#39;t thought of a solution to this issue that loosened the requirements. I remember thinking that this would be good for now and that if a better solution is found it can be incorporated without breaking backward compatibility. This is where we are now. Clearly not everything is the most complete solution possible. I&#39;d not have released anything otherwise.</div>
<div> </div><div>I&#39;m very keen to incorporate Akira&#39;s work. The plan is to merge this directly. I attempted to accelerate the process by eliminating the need for an official mini-review as had been suggested. I anticipate having more time to work on the Trac tickets and then this integration early in the new year.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div></div><div>How is this done by OvenToBoost&#39;s dropped and taken adaptors? Can you</div><div>point me to the source code?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thx, Rob.</div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Rob it appears from your comment that you have have a number of design criticisms. Would you please make these in a more concrete fashion either on-list or however you feel most comfortable? I&#39;d rather not lose the feedback, but the feedback (to paraphrase - I think the designs dodgy) has very limited utility. If there are considerations let&#39;s make them specific and consider superior alternatives.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Neil Groves</div></div>