Stefan Slapeta <stefan_nospam_@slapeta.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
No it does not, but it may cost you an extra bool in your iterator class.
Not necessary. Could anybody comment this fix (...and apply it if it's ok)? Tests are fine.
I don't know what the original code is and I don't want to have to try to piece them together, so it would help if you'd just post what you believe to be a conforming iterator. That said...
BTW, the replace test doesn't compile at all with VC7.1+STLPort. I'll have a look on that later.
Stefan
--- find_iterator.hpp 15 Jul 2004 21:48:25 -0000 1.8 +++ find_iterator.hpp 19 Jul 2004 14:41:19 -0000 @@ -136,14 +136,10 @@ // comparison bool equal( const find_iterator& Other ) const { - return + return eof() || Other.eof() ? eof() == Other.eof() : ( m_Match==Other.m_Match && m_End==Other.m_End - ) - || - ( - eof() && Other.eof() );
This appears to be a complicated way to write: return eof() && Other.eof() || m_Match==Other.m_Match && m_End==Other.m_End; Somehow that seems unlikely to be correct. Are m_Match and m_End valid when eof() is true? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com