From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-23 22:03:05
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daryle Walker" <darylew_at_[hidden]>
> I shortened it in the latest version (17). I want to distinguish between
> the type that the operators will be associated with (T) and any other
> (U) that the operators may use.
The generated operators are functions at namespace scope and thus not any
more associated with one operand than they are with another. Seriously. The
only difference between T and U is that if one is a "more-expressive" type,
you usually want that to be T, since T op U => T.
> > Do you think some explanation of the difference between the iterator
> > archetypes and helpers would be in order? I have some doubts about the
> > general utility of the iterator archetypes in situations where the
> > helpers couldn't be used. Are they worth the trouble? Users can easily
> > that functionality out of the component operator templates.
> I added a little explanation. I guess the archetype-only template could
> helpful if the iterator sub-typedefs were already done in the class. (The
> iterator helper templates would add a second version of those names.)
P.S. I know it's well-intentioned, but if you forward me duplicate copies of
what you post to the list I have twice as much mail to read and if I reply
to the wrong one it goes only to you... so if it's no trouble, please just
post the discussion to boost.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk