Re: [boost] Re: FOREACH / C++ "for" proposal

From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-09 16:32:40

In-Reply-To: <loom.20050509T200130-152_at_[hidden]>
nesotto_at_[hidden] (Thorsten Ottosen) wrote (abridged):
> > Also it requires users to #include <iterator> in order to use the new 
> > looping construct. There's precedent for that, though, because users 
> > must #include <typeinfo> to use typeid. I can't decide how I feel 
> > > about that. Perhaps there's another way.
> 
> I spoke with several implementers and they all said that we need to 
> include some special header...otherwise it is very problematic to let 
> the compiler and standard library work together.

Could you include a very specific header, eg called <for>, with just 
whatever it is "for" needs, and require that header to be #included by 
<iterator> and <vector> and the other containers?

Or some similar mechanism... obviously there needs to be a way for end 
users to get the support for their own containers, and although I suppose 
just #including <iterator> would do, a smaller header might be better for 
the same reason that <vector> doesn't #include <iterator>.

I appreciate that having standard headers document what other headers they 
include is a new thing. Would it be a problem in this case?

-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.