Subject: Re: [boost] [range] adaptors vs. rvalue to lvalue& binding
From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-23 11:33:28
On 3/23/2012 4:20 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> One possibility:
>> - make adaptor expressions return const rvalues. The const rvalues will
>> bind to T& arguments (where T is a template parameter) by deducing T
>> to be const.
I don't like this one.
>> - make even the const_iterators for such adaptors mutable (writable) iterators
>> This accurately reflects the fact that such adaptors don't own their values.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk