[boost] Re: String Algo bug.

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-19 15:03:32

Stefan Slapeta <stefan_nospam__at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> No it does not, but it may cost you an extra bool in your iterator
>> class.
>> 
>
> Not necessary. Could anybody comment this fix (...and apply it if it's
> ok)? Tests are fine.

I don't know what the original code is and I don't want to have to
try to piece them together, so it would help if you'd just post what
you believe to be a conforming iterator.  That said...

> BTW, the replace test doesn't compile at all with VC7.1+STLPort. I'll
> have a look on that later.
>
> Stefan
>
>
> --- find_iterator.hpp	15 Jul 2004 21:48:25 -0000	1.8
> +++ find_iterator.hpp	19 Jul 2004 14:41:19 -0000
> @@ -136,14 +136,10 @@
>               // comparison
>               bool equal( const find_iterator& Other ) const
>               {
> -                return
> +                return eof() || Other.eof() ? eof() == Other.eof()
> :
>                       (
>                           m_Match==Other.m_Match &&
>                           m_End==Other.m_End
> -                    )
> -                    ||
> -                    (
> -                        eof() && Other.eof()
>                       );

This appears to be a complicated way to write:

   return eof() && Other.eof()
          || m_Match==Other.m_Match && m_End==Other.m_End;

Somehow that seems unlikely to be correct.  Are m_Match and m_End
valid when eof() is true?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com