3 Jun
2005
3 Jun
'05
7:33 p.m.
David Abrahams wrote:
christopher diggins <cdiggins@videotron.ca> writes:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Neal Becker" <ndbecker2@gmail.com>
Here's my version:
[snip]
That code looks great! Any reason it can't go into boost as is? I would like to see that and a version which takes the step as a template parameter, to improve efficiency when the step size is known at compile-time.
A. there are no tests
B. What about the undefined behavior that results when you stride off the end of a container?
Is there any reasonable way to detect this? If it is feasible without significantly increasing cost, I'll add it - but offhand I don't know that it is generally feasible.