From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-27 01:09:40
David Abrahams wrote:
>>> I don't think you need that other requirement. Remember, an invalid
>>> iterator can't be incremented. So if r is dereferenceable, it's
>>> valid. You're still allowed to increment s (a copy of r) after r is
>>> incremented, so it can't have been invalidated by incrementing r.
>>> If you're interested in *referent stability* of copies of r,
>> What's 'referent stability'?
> the stability of "what's referred to" by the iterator.
E.g. stability of *reference*? Or stability of the referred value?
>>>> BTW, do new iterator requirement state that iterator type X is
>>>> interoperable with itself?
>>> Not explicitly, but that is certainly a logical implication of the
>>> requirements on single pass iterators.
>> How? I can't decude that from any of singla pass iterator requirements.
> Incrementable iterator is a refinement of Assignable and Copy
> Constructible, and == is an equivalence relation, etc.
equivalence relation, in mathematical sense is a relation which is
reflexive, transitive, and symmentric. Hmm.. I guess I only need to
understand this requirement for Assignable:
t = u post: t is equivalent to u
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk