From: Fernando Cacciola (fcacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-23 12:36:46
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] iterator::operator
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> | > The same argument applies to .
> | A weaker version of the argument. Only random access iterators have ,
> | users cannot expect all iterators to supply it.
> The whole story about iterators started with pointers :-) And users
> do use  with pointers (which are supposed to provide a canonical
> example of random access iterator).
Yes, but users do use  with pointers because a pointer can be used to
refer to an array -a container-. If you use  with a pointer you are
referring to the underlying array which is identified by the pointer.
As others said, subscripting is a collection operation, and an iterator
denotes an element of the collection, not the collection itself. This is (or
should be, actually) a fundamental difference between pointers and
iterators, because a pointer also denotes an array.
IMO, subscripting should have never been part of the iterator semantics.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk