From: Yuval Ronen (ronen_yuval_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-20 01:48:24
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 asked this question at the Microsoft forums and the answer was that
release (checked) iterators are conformant, while debug iterators are
not - http://tinyurl.com/jwgvv.
I guess that if anyone thinks otherwise, MS people would be glad to here
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk