gast128 wrote:

Dear all,

it seems that the pointer container library does not interfere well with back_inserter, i.e.

boost::ptr_vector<int> v2; std::back_insert_iterator< boost::ptr_vector<int> > b(v2); b.operator=(new int); //forget it

[remark: I assume you only use int as example?]

This is unfortunate, because now a lot of STL (or our own adapters) containers can't be used (e.g. std::transform, std::generate_n)

This is because the concept of a PtrContainer is not the same as a Container. Specifically, back_inserter() will try to call push_back() which does not take a T& parameter, but a T* parameter. operator=() in back_insert_iterator will on the other take a T& parameter. After the review, the T& overloads for push_back() etc were removed because people felt they weren't needed. I see two ways to solve the problem: 1. overload push_back(), push_front(), insert() etc for T& parameters 2. provide a new function: template< class PtrCont > ptr_back_insert_iterator<PtrCont> ptr_back_inserter( PtrCont& c ) { return ptr_back_insert_iterator<PtrCont>(c); } template< class PtrCont > class ptr_back_insert_iterator<PtrCont> { ... ptr_back_insert_iterator& operator=( typename PtrCont::reference r ) { c_.push_back( new_clone(r) ); return *this; } }; Have I overlooked something? I think I would favor option 1. However, this should be discussed in the developer list first. I'm also planning to drop the forced non-copyability (by providing cc and ca) since we have discussed in a couple of times and both times I seemed to be the only one who favors the current design. -Thorsten