Re: [Boost-users] [review] Review of Unordered library begins today December 7

From: JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-16 06:43:30

----- Mensaje original -----
De: Daniel James <daniel_james_at_[hidden]>
Fecha: Domingo, Diciembre 16, 2007 10:56 am
Asunto: Re: [Boost-users] [review] Review of Unordered library begins 
todayDecember 7
Para: boost-users_at_[hidden]

> On 15/12/2007, Cromwell Enage <sponage_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > The implementation rationale is detailed enough;
> > however, I am curious as to the purpose of
> > BOOST_UNORDERED_LOCAL_CBEGIN.
> 
> To be honest, it's something I'd forgotten about. A while ago, the
> 'cbegin' and 'cend' members were added to all the standard containers
> in the draft standard for accessing 'const_iterator' regardless of
> whether the container is const or not. But they weren't added for the
> unordered containers' local iterators (the iterators for single
> buckets). If that macro is defined they are included in the
> implementation.
> 
> I think the best thing to do is include the methods as an extension
> and document and test them properly. I might add a macro to turn off
> extensions.
> 
> Joaquín asked about this on comp.std.c++ but didn't get any reply:

I think it's already safe to include them unconditionally:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2482.html#691

Best,

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo