From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-29 16:28:23
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Siek" <jsiek_at_[hidden]>
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, David Abrahams wrote:
> abraha> Or, perhaps the requirement of default-constructibility does.
Consider a new
> abraha> dimension of granularity for your iterator category refinement!
> Hmm, I think it would be pretty bad to have iterators that are not defualt
> constructible. For example, you couldn't use tie() to intialize a pair of
tie() is cute, but unneccessary; default-construct + tie is maybe even
inefficient, depending on the iterator.
> shoot, putting iterators in std::pair at all would become
Why? There's no default-construction here:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk