From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-12-07 19:36:30
Herb Sutter wrote on 12/7/99 6:46 PM
>Unfortunately, this is impossible. The main reason this iterator requirements
>change will never happen is that relaxing iterator requirements would remove
>guarantees that conforming programs are now allowed to depend upon --
>would break a lot of existing code. For example, I know of commercial
>implementations of the standard library where some algorithms quite rightly
>assume the T&'s and won't compile with vector<bool>.
I've gotten some of the Metrowerks library to work with vector<bool>, for
example std:sort. But I'm sure I haven't gotten everything to work. I
was motivated by irate customers wanting to sort with their custom
iterators which returned proxies. I learned that I could accomidate them
without any sacrifice (beyond what vector<bool>::iterator provides).
>In Dublin, Dave Abrahams floated the idea of creating a new set of
>ProxyableContainer requirements. This is possible, but as yet no one has
>volunteered to write them.
vector<bool>::iterator would be a good start.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk