Subject: Re: [boost] Breaking existing libraries
From: Daniel Walker (daniel.j.walker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-23 20:18:08
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 5:58 PM, vicente.botet <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> From: "Thorsten Ottosen" <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]>
> "I guess The old behavior could be supplied in
> <boost/range/deprecated/iterator_range.hpp> in namespace
> boost::deprecated. Again, it is a matter of time."
> Is this a good compromise for all?
This is fine with me. But one thing more... While we're at it, could
we please have something like the Range concept definitions that were
established in the review/release for 1.32, i.e. something with
empty(r), size(r), etc. They are a superset of the requirements in the
current definitions, so reintroducing them won't effect code that was
written since their untimely demise in 1.35. If time is an issue and
you need help, just ask. Even though, lately, I've been shamefully
slow at submitting code, I might be able to pitch in.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk