4 May
2005
4 May
'05
4:39 p.m.
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
I guess the design could havebeen that way; but we don't say container< const T >::iterator to get container<T>::const_iterator.
Isn't range_iterator<R>::type the iterator type of the range R?
Yes, in a world where iterator and const_iterator are distinguished.
Isn't it the return type of r.begin(), where r is of type R (in the typical container case)?
Not when R is const. In that case you get the const_iterator type. Unless you live in the world I'm proposing, in which case the iterator type of C const is C's const_iterator type.
Doesn't r.begin() return R::const_iterator when R is const?
Yes. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com