Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [gil::io] Feedback for scanline_read_iterator
From: Christian Henning (chhenning_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-18 19:23:51

>> I think Phil means rather than do the read in operator++, just set a flag
>> in operator++ that the read should be done, and actually do it in
>> operator* (which then clears the flag). Then if someone calls operator++
>> again without calling operator* (which you can detect by the flag being
>> set in operator++), you can do a skip in operator++, and thus avoid
>> decoding the line you didn't need.
> Interesting idea. I'll update the code.

Actually that doesn't work. How would the user signal to just skip a
scanline? I cannot add a parameter to operator++.

scanline_read_iterator< Reader >& operator++( bool read_scanline =
true ) { //to something }


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at