Subject: Re: [boost] [mpl]iter_fold_if Forward Backward rationale?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-08 11:35:21
on Sun Apr 05 2009, Larry Evans <cppljevans-AT-suddenlink.net> wrote:
> Just as the ForwardPredicate is "augmented" with protection
> against dereferencing the end<numbers>::type in this code:
> shouldn't the BackwardPredicate also be augmented with the same
> protection here:
Well, it doesn't need to be; if it did, tests and uses wouldn't compile
Just think about how you'd implement it and it should become obvious why.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk