From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-23 03:17:08
"Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> At 06:12 AM 2/22/2004, Bronek Kozicki wrote:
> Ouch! That seems an unfortunate design decision.
> Perhaps two forms of
> constructors could have been provided - one form that takes two iterators
> and doesn't store a copy of the contents, and another form like the
> constructors which takes a container reference but (unlike the current
> constructor) makes a copy. I wonder if that was discussed at the time? Or
> is there a better way to prevent the problem?
Why not change the existing constructor to
tokenizer( /*const*/ Container& c,const TokenizerFunc& f = TokenizerFunc())
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk