From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-07-03 23:20:48
----- Original Message -----
> So there's this workaround I'm tempted to use:
> typedef list<foo>::iterator list_iter;
> typedef list<list_iter> A;
> typedef list<list_iter> B;
> And then cast the list_iter to the real iterator type. I think this
> should be safe... anyone disagree?
Sure I disagree! ;)
Well, it will work on most machines/compilers/libraries, but "should be
safe" is pushing it a bit, I think.
> Is this a common enough problem that there should be a general
> solution? Somethink like a void_iterator that can do everything a
> normal iterator can do, except be dereferenced (and which also can
> be converted back to a non-void iterator).
Hmm, I'm not sure exactly what you're doing, but I've had to implement
associative containers indexable by 2 different keys; I ended up storing an
iterator to one map in the other, but a pointer to the elements in the
first. Don't know if this helps for your case, though.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk