From: Yuval Ronen (ronen_yuval_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-18 15:32:29
David Abrahams wrote:
> Yuval Ronen <ronen_yuval_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> b. Normally our default is not the same as the compiler's default when
>>> the compiler's default is nonconformant, as it is in this case.
>> What's nonconformant about these checked iterators (apart from the
>> warnings, which are annoying, but not nonconformant)?
> They don't meet the complexity requirements (big-O) for iterators.
(I have already posted a similar post, but it seems it didn't show up,
so I re-post. Sorry if mistaken)
Does anyone have a readily available link to a paper (by Microsoft or
others) describing the differences between the complexity of the checked
iterators and the standard (I looked in MSDN and Google, but found nothing)?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk