Re: [Boost-Users] Re: boost::date_time : iterator model

From: George A. Heintzelman (georgeh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-27 11:45:44

> Right, this will do it. I think I shall pursue this way.
> However, date is quite a low-level class, and it sounds perfectly 
> reasonable to create a vector of dates.

> My opinion is that ability to create vectors is a strong argument for 
> providing default constructor; it is not really that important what
> exact value it sets date to, as long as it is not a regular date. I 
> personally have a slight preference for not_a_date.

Um, you can create a std::vector of a non-default-constructible object. 
It needs to be CopyConstructible, not DefaultConstructible. The only 
issue is that occasionally you may need to pass in a default 
initializer (e.g., when resizing (not reserving) or push_back-ing with 
no argument).

Now, whether a date should nevertheless be default-constructible is 
another issue, but simply being able to put them in a vector is not an 
argument for it.

George Heintzelman
georgeh_at_[hidden]