From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-03 08:14:42
"Pavol Droba" <droba_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 11:02:59PM +1100, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> > "Pavol Droba" <droba_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:20031103111711.GD12977_at_lenin.felcer.sk...
> > > On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 09:09:34PM +1100, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> > Besides, I couldn't find one place were you call it in the string
> I see no problem with removing 'reverse'. You are right, it is not used
> and probably I just forgot to remove it.
I used grep -r
> > You
> > made the string algorithms
> > as generic as possible, but you don't think the range should be as
> > as possible :-).
> Sure, it is a kind of generalization. But what benefit would it bring to
> such a generalization?
> How can a range of numbers (a.k.a interaval) be used by an algorithm?
> iterator_range contains iterators, and due to nature of iterators it
> to iterate (access) the elements in the range. I realy don't see anything,
> that could such a generalization bring. Can you provide some examples
> it could be useful. A place where a range of iterators can be used in the
> same way as a generic range (a numeric interval)...
I see your point. I imagined range a bit like an interval which is already
provided in a superior way.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk