Subject: Re: [boost] [iterators] Proof-of-concept for a sentinel iterator adapter
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-13 19:00:14
Steven Watanabe wrote:
> How do you plan to represent the end without adding extra overhead for
In the general case, you would need to use a boolean since you cannot
just set the iterator to some magic value such as null.
The case of pointers could still be specialized.
The efficiency overhead could eventually be avoided by relaxing the
requirement that both the begin and the end iterator should have the
same type, as was suggested by David Abrahams in this message:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk