[boost] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: String Algo Review Results

From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-03 08:14:42

"Pavol Droba" <droba_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:20031103123236.GF12977_at_lenin.felcer.sk...
> 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
library.
> >
>
> I see no problem with removing 'reverse'. You are right, it is not used
anymore,
> 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
generic
> > as possible :-).
>
> Sure, it is a kind of generalization. But what benefit would it bring to
make
> 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
allows
> 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
where
> 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.

cheers

Thorsten