Re: [boost] [review] Fusion review begins: iterator equal_to doesn't compare values

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-10 17:10:15

Larry Evans <cppljevans_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On 05/10/2006 03:04 PM, dan marsden wrote:
>
>> I believe that the position of a fusion iterator must be encoded in
>> the information available at compile. This is needed for fusion sequences
>> to serve as conforming MPL sequences (and probably various other things).
>
> OK, maybe I misunderstood.  I thought that since operator* returns a 
> value instead of a type (obviously), that two iterators would be equal
> only when they were the same length and each value returned by operator*
> was equal.  Is that not the case?

Do you dereference normal STL iterators inside their comparison operators?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com