From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-23 08:51:19
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> Here's a list of things I feel strongly about changing (see below for
> - relation should have the same members as std::pair
Maybe, I quite like the systematic use of left and right personally.
> - types should lie with members, so
> map::left_type::iterator i = m.left.begin()
> instead of
> map::left_iterator i = m.left.begin()
Isn't that true now? Or rather that both are possible currently?
My only comment is that it's a lot easier to write:
typedef typename map::left_iterator it_type;
typedef typename map::left_type left_type;
typedef typename left_type::iterator it_type;
So I would go with both.
> - operator() seems way to complicatedly specified and does not
> the promise of mirroring STL. Keep the mutable operator() and then
> value& map.at( const key& );
> const value& map.at( const key& ) const;
> which throws on lookup failure.
I found that section confusing as well, anything simpler would be welcome.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk