Re: template<typename C> C::reverse_iterator erase(C&, C::reverse_iterator)

From: Paul Hollingsworth (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-17 09:57:54

> Hello,
> 
> i don't think your approch is a better one....this needs space and
> a kind of copy operator has to be called internally.

I suspect that without looking at the generated code on some popular 
compilers, it is not obvious that returning a copy of the iterator is 
going to be less efficient than the alternatives.

The compiler is free to optimise out redundant calls to the copy 
constructor. This is a situation in which the Return Value 
Optimisation might come into play, for example.

In any case, my point was that most programmers (which is what I 
meant by the phrase "average programmers") really don't (and should 
not) care about micro-inefficiencies like this, and would prefer a 
more uniform and hence less error prone interface.

Paul Hollingsworth
http://PaulHollingsworth.com