Subject: Re: [boost] for_each abstraction
From: joel falcou (joel.falcou_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-17 16:24:28
On 17/11/10 22:18, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
> Are you objecting to the syntax or to the entire idea of letting
> sequences opt in for tighter control of their iteration?
> I'm not 100% convinced it's a good idea, but I'm not convinced it's a
> bad idea either. It appears (to me, at least) to be one solution to
> the OP's question, and to Mathias/Joel's problem with "packing" range
> elements together to vectorize operations.
> It also could (speculation) make iterating over a type-erased range
> more efficient, compared to using type-erased iterators.
Binding algorithm to container type lessen genericity of code.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk