MB <mb2act@yahoo.co.jp> writes:
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
Dear All,
I have been trimming boost.range to incorporate the changes we have been discussing some time ago.
These changes will break many uses of the library. Inside boost
David Abrahams wrote: this will affect
Boost.foreach Boost.string algo Boost.iostreams (*)
(*) I don't this will break
The list of major changes is the follwing:
1. ADL hooks renamed boost_range_begin -> range_begin, boost_range_end -> range_end
Why was such short name accepted?? Even 'const_begin' that calls unqualified 'begin' breaks down Boost.MPL!!
This was a bug. In the new version there is no unqualified call to begin(), end(), size() and empty().
How so? What happens? Got a small reproducible case?
GCC ADL looks up a class named "end" too. Old story.
2. ADL hook boost_range_size removed; boost::size(rng) now requires RandomAccessIterators to guarantee O(1) complexity.
3. range_result_iterator renamed range_iterator and range_iterator renamed mutable_iterator. The correct way to spell const_iterator<T> is now iterator<const T>.
range_result_iterator is alive? If so, it's nice. :-)
It's dead, sort of, or that was the intention. It's behavior is now modelled by range_iterator.
4. intrinsic string support removed. instead a header as_literal.hpp is previded with a small utility for use in string algorithms.
FWIW, I experienced "Range adaptor syntax" could make it prettier.
Thorsten, did you consider providing a backward compatibility layer for the transition?
Yes, but I don't have a good way to do this. putting the old version in, say, boost/range/v1 was rejected because of ODR problems. Do you have any ideas? -Thorsten