Subject: Re: [boost] [iterator] counting_iterator::reference shouldbevalue_type?
From: Arno SchÃ¶dl (aschoedl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-06 10:50:52
> It's not "so bad," it's just an unnecessary limitation. If you really
> need a random access counting iterator, you'd be out of luck.
It seems to me that the standard should specify whether iterator::reference must outlive its iterator. Then the current counting_iterator is wrong. Or iterator::reference may die with its iterator, then reverse_iterator is wrong. If the C++ standard is quiet on this issue, maybe it should be clarified.
-- Dr. Arno Schoedl Â· aschoedl_at_[hidden] Technical Director think-cell Software GmbH Â· Invalidenstr. 34 Â· 10115 Berlin, Germany http://www.think-cell.com Â· phone +49-30-666473-10 Â· toll-free (US) +1-800-891-8091 Directors: Dr. Markus Hannebauer, Dr. Arno Schoedl Â· Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 85229
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk