From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-12 21:02:37
John Torjo <john.lists_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Like Robert I am uncomfortable with a range concept that has
>> iteration capabilities. For one thing, standard containers don't
>> satisfy that concept, and it seems to me
>> that a container ought to be a range without
>> any special adaptation. Furthermore
> Well... This was to allow easy manual loops.
>> I have doubts about how well this "range/iterator" concept maps onto
>> and random access. That said...
> It maps ok with bidirectional/random access. If an iterator has a
> given iterator category, the range will preserve it. I have used it in
> code, and it's quite powerful.
Don't you need a current position, start and an end for bidirectional
iteration? Forward "ranges" just get a current position and an end.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk