From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-10 18:38:41
On 02/01/2005 07:28 AM, Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
> I think that one major problem is that you promise next<> and prev<> on
> integrals. It would be quite problematic to satisfy this for enums staying
> in the same enum type.
In the sandbox vault, there's range_all.zip which, IFAICT, solves this
problem by having a separate class, range_c_max, for including the
max value in the enumeration. Also next<> and prev<> have been
specialized as well as integral_rank. In addition, files in aux_/
preprocessed/gcc had to be modified by supplying an explicit
cast from an integral to the enumeration.
Anyway, the tests provided are for size and for_each (which
actually iterates over the whole enumeration). Also, mpl::minus
had to be specialized for size to work.
Comments and suggested improvements are welcome.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk