From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-02 01:46:28
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:uoekp5v5w.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
| "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
| > I asked Jeremy if I could use it as a basis for my docs...so I did...but then most changed so only a few of Jeremy's original
| > are left. The results are in libs/range/doc/range.html IIRC.
| Is one redundant now? Should one concept refine the other (refactorization)?
Jeremy's collection concept had the same motivation as the range concept: to lower requirement on container types.
However, Jeremy's concept talk about member functions and still mentions a reference type that behaves like a normal reference, but
doesn't have to be it. In the range concepts that is all gone.
So my personal feeling is that collection.html is redundant now.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk