From: Ben Bear (benbearchen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-11 20:43:16
Thank you first. I'm so glad :-)
2007/11/12, Hervé Brönnimann <hervebronnimann_at_[hidden]>:
> Ben: I'm shocked to discover such a "natural" extension of prev_ and
> next_permutation, and that one year later it still isn't in the
> standard. I have a commitment to algorithms and to C++. This should
> definitely make it in a TR, but IMHO it's simple enough and useful
> enough that it should even definitely be in C++0x if there's still time.
I't simple, but not very clear. I know how it works, but I nearly
can't prove and explain why.
The functions are like std::next_ and prev_permutation, but the
classes are not. <algorithm> has no classes. The five classes are a
little like STL containers, have the [begin(), end()), but dynamic
Another truth, it will exist a conflict between the
gacap::next_permutation(first, middle, last) and
std::next_permutation(first, last, comp).
> I've had success in getting the boost.minmax library into C++0x
> I'm proud to say it took all of ten minutes of the committee's time
> in Mont-Tremblant for the making the decision. I'll see if I can
> work on your proposal. Get in touch later.
There's no (good) proposal yeat. I think it's a hard work. Should I
draft a simple proposal?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk