From: John E. Potter (jpotter_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-07 06:36:44
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> Hmm.. just noticed that the discussion more and more drifts to something
> more appropriate for comp.std.c++ than for this list :).
Yep. You might take a look at an old thread "output iterator is not an
> Thinking more about this sentence, doesn't it mean that a value type
> of, for example, an 'std::ostream_iterator<>' is, well,
> std::ostream_iterator<>? <g>
Sure, and since (*it).operator++() is valid, it->operator++() must be.
To quote Matt, "Output iterator is a strange duck". It may be a goose.
Standardizing a self proxy without requiring it is hard to do. The
insert iterators and ostream_iterator are clear, but the concept?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk