From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-01 16:58:09
At 12:00 PM 8/1/2002, Mattias Flodin wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 08:33:24AM -0400, Beman Dawes wrote:
>> >What I've been meaning to ask, after this somewhat wordy post, are two
>> >things. First, path::begin() returns a mutable iterator. Shouldn't it
>> >returning a const iterator, for the same reasons as above? Same thing
>> >goes for path::end().
>> I'm not quite sure what you mean here.
>I mean that code such as
>p2.begin() = p2.end();
>path::iterator it = ++p2.begin();
Ah, yes, I see what you mean. But that is a general problem with the
design of iterators, isn't it, rather than a problem with
path? path::begin() can't return a const iterator; iteration (operator++,
operator--) wouldn't work!
> In other words the return value from path::begin() is mutable
>and the one returned from path::leaf() is not. This is inconsistent. Or
>am I mistaken?
leaf() has the same semantics as the standard's optional sequence operation
back(), although it returns by value rather than reference. That design
decision reflects my opinion that a path shouldn't be viewed as a
full-blown container, but rather a specialized component which happens to
have a few characteristics in common with containers.
>Speaking of the docs, a description of what many of the functions
>(e.g. path::leaf()) do seems to be missing. But perhaps that's on the
Are you looking at the latest version? Or perhaps it is confusing that
path::leaf() and a number of other functions are fully specified simply by
their "Returns" paragraph? But that's all there is to it; you don't need
an involved description.
Thanks for the comments!
I'd also like to hear usage reports, if anyone is trying the library out on
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk