Re: [boost] Proposed Iterator Adaptor change

From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-07 10:18:28

Yes, I ran into a problem caused by the over enthusiasm recently... though
I'll need some time to think about this more carefully.

On Sun, 6 Jan 2002, David Abrahams 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
>
> ===================================================
>   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_[hidden]
> ===================================================
>
>
>
> Info: http://www.boost.org  Send unsubscribe requests to: <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jeremy Siek                          http://www.osl.iu.edu/~jsiek/
 Ph.D. Student, Indiana Univ. B'ton   email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
 C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)   office phone: [phone]
----------------------------------------------------------------------