Re: [boost] reorder_iterator : iterator_adaptor

From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-24 13:20:27

> Understood. My initial impression was that your implementation was rather
> complicated, considering the the functionality you were trying to acheive,
> so I thought it would be worth discussing alternatives.

your implementation is indeed simpler and needs fewer code lines.

About your hybrid proposal, I'm not sure yet.

The most serious flaw however in my first proposal was that the
past-the-end permutation iterator is defined by the past-the-end
iterator of it's second argument which is unacceptable.

t