From: AlisdairM (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-10 05:25:30
Brian McNamara <lorgon_at_[hidden]> wrote in news:20031007010744.GA21887
> Maybe another way to state my point is that I see container_traits as a
> "concept wrapper" rather than a "module". It takes a concept (as
> described by, e.g., the standard) and wraps it in a more convenient and
> generic interface. This allows more types to model the concept (e.g.
> an array can be a Container when viewed via container_traits) and
> provides a single named entity which clients of the concept (e.g.
> generic functions) can use to get at the concept attributes.
Minor nitpick, but an array can never be a Container conforming to the
standard, as there are requirements to add/remove elements and arrays are
I have tried to address this in a proposal to standardise boost::array, but
I'm not sure we'll see changes to the Container concept adopted <g>
So if arrays can be modelled by container_traits, it is modelling a
different concept than that in the standard (although arguably a more
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk