Re: [boost] [range] concepts.hpp broken

From: shunsuke (pstade.mb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-29 12:49:50

Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>> It seems a rational idea; "NVI" is always better.
> 
> nvi?

Non-Virtual Interface. Say, Non-Specializable-Metafunction in this context? :-)

>> BTW, why not remove range_size<> from RandomAccessConcept,
>> which is utterly useless, and even wrong around iterator range.
> 
> I'm all for removing it.
> 
> Why do you think it's wrong?

`boost::size(make_iterator_range(...))`
would copy range_difference<...>::type into std::size_t.

boost::make_unsigned<> might help, but
anyway it is unneeded to force range_size<> specialization.

Regards,

-- 
Shunsuke Sogame