Subject: Re: [boost] [range] Should ranges really propagate constess to the data ?
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-24 10:02:09
On 07/24/2011 03:41 PM, Neil Groves wrote:
> How do you imagine the const / mutable underlying iterator would be chosen?
> If you are proposing that the const-ness of the sub_range template parameter
> is used, I think that this would break to much existing code. The current
> semantics have been in place since at least version 1.33.
I doubt it would break much code if something that was a const_iterator
previously is now an iterator, since an iterator is usually convertible
to its const version.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk