[boost] Re: notation question

From: Dirk Gerrits (dirk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-08 12:23:35

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> 
> David Abrahams wrote:
> 
>> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
> 
>>> I'd prefer the latter variant, so that non-broken platforms use more 
>>> natural
>>> syntax. Another question is whether we could use only the second 
>>> version.
>>> Theoretically, if you call the second version on const string, then 
>>> InputT
>>> should be deduced as "const string". You can then write a simple 
>>> wrapper to
>>> select const_iterator or iterator.
>>>
>>> The only problem is, IIRC, borland drops "const" on template arguments
>>> sometimes, and that's not possible to fix. Also, the "simple wrapper"
>>> requires partial specialization. So, I'm not sure this approach is
>>> viable, either.
>>
>>
>>
>> There are mostly-transparent solutions.  Something like:
>>
>>     // find_first sequence const version
>>     template< typename InputT, typename SearchT >
>>     inline iterator_range< typename InputT::const_iterator >
>>     find_first_impl( const InputT& Input, const SearchT& Search, 0 )
>>     {
>>         ...
>>     }
> 
> 
> I'm guessing the last parameter should be "int"?

Shouldn't it be long? I think I saw overload pairs in some Boost header 
(from Boost Python I believe) where one overload had a dummy int 
parameter and one overload had a dummy long parameter.

I assumed it was to workaround the partial ordering bug but I'm not 100% 
sure. But Dave's upcoming reply should clarify things. ;)

Dirk Gerrits