Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> wrote in message news:02b001c554cd$47504940$6401a8c0@pdimov2...
[...]
for( [type] [identifier] : [expr] ) [statement]
Let e of type E be the value of [expr]. For each iterator i in the range
- [ e.begin(), e.end() ) when E is not an array type; - [ e, e + N ) when E is T[N],
executes the compound statement
{ [type] [identifier] = *i; [statement] }
doesn't require library support.
but it wouldn't work with pair<iterator,iterator> without an adapter.
Correct. I think that the benefits of not having to include <iterator> and confining this to a pure core extension not requiring library support outweigh the costs. pair<iterator, iterator> is not the proper way to express an iterator range anyway; its use in the standard library only serves to highlight the lack of iterator_range<iterator>, or even range<iterator>, if you prefer.
One reasonable extension
perhaps. C++ is typed language.
would be to allow [type] to be omitted, ...
This form is even more typed than the other, because it doesn't let you accidentally supply a wrong type.