Re: [boost] Standard library Technical Report 2 proposals for Boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Standard library Technical Report 2 proposals for Boost libraries
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-12-06 06:25:56

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Olaf van der Spek <ml_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1810.html
>>> for the original TR2 call for proposals. While the details will
>>> change, it is still a reasonable introduction to what is required. A
>>> preliminary proposal would just say "To be supplied" for the "Proposed
>>> Text for the Standard" section.
>>
>> What's the best way to request something simple,
>
> Committee members sometimes just open issues for really simple new
> feature requests, but that tends to work well only for those who
> attend meetings and/or are frequent contributors.
>
> A paper is probably best, even if it is very short. Papers just plain
> carry more weight, and are read by a wider audience.
>
>> like the addition of size_type to iterator_traits?
>
> Out of curiosity, size_type of what?

It's to solve the iterator_range::size() issue.
So the size type for a range denoted by two iterators.

> Also, iterator_traits is viewed as an anachronism by some influential
> committee members, both because of the lumping of multiple traits into
> a single class and because of the problems using the current
> iterator_traits with SFINAE. So you might want to consider a set of
> replacement traits that follows modern practice. Proposing something
> like that for Boost would be a good start.

I've never used iterator_traits myself and am not aware of these
problems. Got any pointers? :p

-- 
Olaf