[boost] Re: New Iterator Adaptors

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-11 16:32:58

Sylvain Pion <Sylvain.Pion_at_[hidden]> writes:

>> I'm guessing "..." is something like, "if default-constructed standard
>> container iterators were non-singular and guaranteed to be unequal to
>> any iterator obtained by other means".
>
> That would be something more like "if default-constructed standard container
> iterators were non-singular and guaranteed to be unequal to any iterator
> obtained by other means, and compare equal to any default-constructed
> iterator."

That sounds roughly correct.

> I.e. the default constructed value must be unique (as far as operator== is
> concerned).

Yep.

>> At the same time, I doubt it belongs in our proposal: we don't say
>> anything about containers (except vector<bool>, and then only in the
>> rationale).  You should write a proposal for extension and submit it
>> to the commitee if you care about this.  It should be easy, compared
>> to the iterator adaptors/categories proposal.
>
> OK.  I'll think about writing something.

I suggest that you think about proposing modifications to the
container requirements table (table 65 in 23.1), rather than trying to
use the wording above.  It's just a hunch, but I think that would be
the cleanest way to do it.

Good luck,
-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com