Subject: Re: [boost] [range] Proposal: addition of front(), back(), at(), operator
From: Eric Niebler (eniebler_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-03-26 12:50:16
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 03/25/2014 01:50 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>
>> Interesting. I think that in C++14, the committee put that
>> possibility to bed. See LWG issue 2360
>> Ill open an issue that gets that cleared up.
> Thinking about this some more, I think that may is the key
> [forward.iterators] says: 6 If a and b are both dereferenceable,
> then a == b if and only if *a and *b are bound to the same object.
> which disallows stashing iterators for forward (or greater)
> So, I think that [iterator.requirements.general] 9 can only really
> be true for input iterators.
That's always been my understanding.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk