Subject: Re: [boost] [offlist] Re: [range] [general] making member functions SFINAE-friendly
From: Jonathan Wakely (jwakely.boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-19 12:03:49
On 19 February 2013 16:46, Neil Groves wrote:
> Hello! I agree that the current implementation of size() sucks. I think the
> standard library design is a bit pants too. I intend to make providing
> implementations of size via ADL extension points. Once this has been done
> I'll make the boost::size algorithm work via this extension point and
> deprecate the iterator_range::size() member function.
> I inherited this mistake IIRC.
> I'm happy to sort it out. Just give me some time. I'm busy crushing Getco
No rush, I know game-changing comes first ;-)
I've already got a workaround in place, so created the ticket as a "I
think this would be better" not "I need this right now!"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk