On 11/17/2010 10:24 PM, joel falcou wrote:
On 17/11/10 22:18, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
Are you objecting to the syntax or to the entire idea of letting sequences opt in for tighter control of their iteration?
I'm not 100% convinced it's a good idea, but I'm not convinced it's a bad idea either. It appears (to me, at least) to be one solution to the OP's question, and to Mathias/Joel's problem with "packing" range elements together to vectorize operations.
It also could (speculation) make iterating over a type-erased range more efficient, compared to using type-erased iterators.
Binding algorithm to container type lessen genericity of code.
Sure, but there is no to change the way how elements in a range are iterated. In my example, the algorithm is entirely provided by for_each with the appropriate operation.