Re: [boost] [iterator] UB when implicitly using default constructed counting_iterator<unsigned>

Subject: Re: [boost] [iterator] UB when implicitly using default constructed counting_iterator<unsigned>
From: Claas H. Köhler (claas.koehler_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-05 11:19:46

On 05/12/12 16:44, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:40 PM, "Claas H. Köhler" <claas.koehler_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I guess this also means, that it is possible to detect singular iterators even if they are
>> initialised upon default construction.
> 
> Only if they've got special debug code and not if they're types like int.
Correct. Basically this would require a boost equivalent of the safe_iterator (that's what its called
in gcc), which could be used to wrap the boost iterators for debugging. Although this is not a
trivial task, it seems preferable to me over leaving members uninitialised for the sake of (arguably)
improved debugging capability.