Re: [boost] [range] [general] making member functions SFINAE-friendly

Subject: Re: [boost] [range] [general] making member functions SFINAE-friendly
From: Markus Klein (markus-klein_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-19 20:38:58

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 0:13 AM, Neil Groves <neil_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> I'm very keen to hear the thoughts of current users since I am unsure
> how much code relies upon iterator_range member size() function.

The codebase my colleagues and I manage makes heavy use of the boost range
library.
I do not think that a single line of code depends of size being a method of
iterator_range.
Actually, before reading this thread I assumed that boost::size would work
via ADL extension
points similar to boost::begin and boost::end. Even if it would break some
code, it seems easy
enough to replace the calls to the method size with calls to the function.
We would trade
some breaking tests for a better library any day (well, most days at least).

Markus
www.clean-cpp.org