Re: Proposed Iterator Adaptor change

From: rogeeff (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-06 23:25:35

--- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> Hi Jeremy and/or anyone else who cares,
> 
> I am thinking that the iterator adaptor library is overly 
enthusiastic in
> selecting the operator_arror_proxy for the result of its operator->
()
> whenever the iterator is no more refined than InputIterator. 
Shouldn't we
> also ask whether the associated reference type is not a reference 
before we
> resort to the proxy? That would be more efficient for lots of 
cases, and
> would even enable operator->() when iterator_adaptor is used to 
iterate over
> an abstract class.
> 
> Have I missed something?
> 
> -Dave

Maybe 'instead' in place of 'also'? I have several input iterators 
based on iterator adaptor, that have an operator ->() returning 
reference to some internal buffer. I would not want a proxy in that 
case.

Gennadiy.

> 
> ===================================================
>   David Abrahams, C++ library designer for hire
>  resume: http://users.rcn.com/abrahams/resume.html
> 
>         C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)
>           email: david.abrahams_at_r...
> ===================================================