Re: [boost] Is Boost.Range broken?

Subject: Re: [boost] Is Boost.Range broken?
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-25 16:29:45

Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> Andrew Sutton skrev:
>> I think this is the right answer (and pretty well argued by now). The
>> behavior of the iterator_range should "inherit" (is there a better
>> word for
>> this?) its semantics from the underlying iterator. To do otherwise would
>> impose requirements on iterators that may not (easily) support those
>> semantics, making the concept less generic (as in represents fewer
>> possible
>> implementations).
> 
> Well, it is fairly easy to remove some of the debug-checks from the
> code. Do I understand you correctly in that you want them all removed?

I think, at least these members should not have asserts:

empty()
begin()
end()

and maybe:

equal()
operator==
operator!=

But I'm less confident about the latter three.