----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Watanabe" <watanabesj@gmail.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 4:32 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Reminder: Boost.RangeEx review is going on
AMDG
vicente.botet wrote:
why do we need two overloading for the non mutating algorithms? I understand the issue for mutatong algorithms, but the parameter is not always const for non mutating ones?
template<class ForwardRange> typename range_iterator<ForwardRange>::type adjacent_find(ForwardRange& rng);
template<class ForwardRange> typename range_iterator<const ForwardRange>::type adjacent_find(const ForwardRange& rng);
For the same reason that we have const and non-const overloads of begin(), end(), operator[], etc. We may need mutating access through the result.
Thanks Steven, I have not chooen the good example. Should we have two overloadings for count? template< class SinglePassRange, class Value > inline BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME range_difference<SinglePassRange>::type count(SinglePassRange& rng, const Value& val) { boost::function_requires< SinglePassRangeConcept<SinglePassRange> >(); return std::count(boost::begin(rng), boost::end(rng), val); } /// \overload template< class SinglePassRange, class Value > inline BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME range_difference<SinglePassRange const>::type count(const SinglePassRange& rng, const Value& val) { boost::function_requires< SinglePassRangeConcept<SinglePassRange> >(); return std::count(boost::begin(rng), boost::end(rng), val); } Vicente