Subject: [ggl] pre-/post-increment op on iterators
From: Barend Gehrels (Barend.Gehrels)
Date: 2009-04-28 09:53:46
>>> Yes, I found it convenient too.
>>> However, I can understand the rationale behind BOOST_FOREACH.
>>> Even if it does require explicit use of value_type, on the other
>>> hand it frees you from knowledge about how container/collection is
>>> being iterated. Iteration is hidden as it is by algorithms.
>>> Second, if functor introduces extra entities into code,
>>> and in some cases it may make code less readable/understandable.
>>> BOOST_FOREACH is handy as replacement for simple loop, plus it
>>> provides nice genericness.
>> Yep, all approaches have their drawbacks and advantages, indeed. So I
>> don't really bother if somebody uses one or the other,
> Same here.
>> I simply wait
>> for the concept-based C++0x for_each that will solve everything :-)
OK, nice. So let's just wait, good idea, and until then use normal
pre-increment in loops.
Many of our loops are on segments anyway, the BOOST_FOREACH will not
A related question, I've created some iterators recently and it would be
convenient to have an interator on a vector which has a segment as its
valuetype. Didn't work it out and don't know if it is possible at all,
do you think it makes sense here?
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net