"David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:uoekp5v5w.fsf@boost-consulting.com... | "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> writes: | > I asked Jeremy if I could use it as a basis for my docs...so I did...but then most changed so only a few of Jeremy's original words | > are left. The results are in libs/range/doc/range.html IIRC. | | Is one redundant now? Should one concept refine the other (refactorization)? Jeremy's collection concept had the same motivation as the range concept: to lower requirement on container types. However, Jeremy's concept talk about member functions and still mentions a reference type that behaves like a normal reference, but which doesn't have to be it. In the range concepts that is all gone. So my personal feeling is that collection.html is redundant now. br Thorsten