Subject: Re: [boost] [Range] Range adaptor approach for temporary range lifetime issue
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-28 07:57:04
on Sun Jun 24 2012, "Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr." <jeffrey.hellrung-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> And, ultimately, if there's ultimately just one call to begin/end on the
> final adapted range (the common case?), both the present implementation of
> the Boost.Range adaptors and a lazy implementation would go through the
> same sequence of iterator constructions, right?
The lazy case is actually able to perform some "optimizations" like
eliminating double-reverses. It's not at all clear that these tricks
would improve performance in reality, though.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk