From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-05 16:23:23
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <f-boost_at_[hidden]>
> --- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> > The "iterator" class isn't a standard-conforming iterator.
> Because of the additional methods?
No, because of (at first glance) the lack of required type definitions. For
more information, see www.oonumerics.org/tmpw01/abrahams.pdf, which
describes the details neccessary for a standard-conforming iterator, and the
boost library which can help you make one.
> It's true, but ... the central thing about this data structure is that
> it is *not* simply a container for unique elements.
I don't understand what that has to do with the iterator issue.
> I think that given the initial response of confusion and so on, I am
> probably fairly alone in having use for this odd-ball...so I will go
> back to my corner.
Don't give up so easily! I think people are responding that way because they
are genuinely interested in having/learning about an additional associative
container technology. Requests for clarification are one of the best things
about boost: they help one clarify one's thinking and improve one's code.
David Abrahams, C++ library designer for hire
C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk