Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: Rozental, Gennadiy (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-24 13:47:51

Next message: Max Khesin: "RE: [boost] STL algorithm for containers (was Re: Re: boost/test/ detail/algorithm.hpp: request forpromotionand/or fast review)"
Previous message: Rozental, Gennadiy: "RE: [boost] STL algorithm for containers (was Re: Re: boost/test/ detail/algorithm.hpp: request forpromotionand/or fast review)"
Maybe in reply to: Gennadiy Rozental: "[boost] input_iterator_facade (was: Re: [iterator facade] Why is dereference const?)"
Next in thread: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [boost] input_iterator_facade (was: Re: [iterator facade] Why is dereference const?)"
Reply: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [boost] input_iterator_facade (was: Re: [iterator facade] Why is dereference const?)"

> I still don't understand which design, yours or mine, is better. It seems
mine
> allows to create iterators with smaller number of lines, but maybe there's

> something else.

Why do you think so? I would say vice versa, since I do not require
constructor in derived class to call found_eof().

Gennadiy.

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk