David Abrahams wrote:
Ion Gaztañaga <igaztanaga@gmail.com> writes:
You haven't really explained what this thing is supposed to be doing. As far as I can tell from the code, it dereferences to the same location at each position. If that's really what you intend, you ought to do something to ensure that its iterator category doesn't indicate it satisfies forward iterator requirements.
A pair of "range_from_ref_iterator" simulates a pair of random access iterators that point to an array of N identical values.
It's not a legal random access (or even forward) iterator if it visits the same *element* more than once in a traversal. That's why I said the above about the iterator category.
Seems like a reasonable idea, but I'm not sure whether it's useful enough to be included. I'd definitely call it something other than range_from_ref_iterator, though. constant_iterator or something like that seems appropriate.
constant_iterator seems good,
Whoops, "constant iterator" is already overloaded with a different meaning. Something else, maybe... "repeat iterator?"
I agree it is nice to have "verb" for 'range adaptors'. copy(x|repeated(10)|transformed..., outIter); repeat_range(repeat_iterator pair) seems to make an object be a range: copy(x|repeated(1), outIter); So generalized! But as Mr.Abrahams pointed, it is pity repeat_iterator for now is illegal. (I remember I wrote the same code as Mr.Gaztanaga's!) Is it possible it can have a legal implementation? I don't know for sure... -- Shunsuke Sogame