From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-17 07:14:44
Fredrik Blomqvist wrote:
> Ah, well, my intention wasn't really to focus on transform_iterator,
> I just used it as an example.
Yes, I know. Me too.
> Although I can see that you're right
> about it not being in sync with it's documentation.
> My point was that default-constructability would make creating _any_
> kind of adaptor based on bind/mem_fn easier and more flexible.
I'm not sure I agree. Adding a default constructor that may create a
singular object is, in my experience, a design mistake. Any component that
requires such a constructor is broken. The main purpose of this constructor
(again, IME) is to allow you to shoot yourself in the foot, as is frequently
the case with the iterators.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk