Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jason Hise (chaos_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-23 00:15:03

Justin Gottschlich wrote:

>Thus, any programmer using the tree could create an iterator for the tree to
>perform any kind of iteration they like (level iteration, tree-depth
>iteration, backwards tree-breadth iteration) and have standard algorithms
>work on that iterator exactly as they had coded. Thus, I wouldn't have to
>"pre-determine" all possible types of iterations (nor tree types) the end
>coder needs.
>Some basic types of tree iteration clearly need to be available that I
>currently don't have. After the great points made today, I most certainly
>will add them. =)
When I read that it immediately made me think "policy based design".
Would there perhaps be some way to make the iterator policy based? Then
the user could use a core::tree::iterator<core::recursive>, or a
core::tree::iterator<core::level_based>, or even a
core::tree::iterator<core::reverse_level_based>. You could provide the
more common iterator policies with your library. I don't know
mechanically how this would be implemented, its just a thought.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at