On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 0:13 AM, Neil Groves <neil@grovescomputing.com> wrote:
I'm very keen to hear the thoughts of current users since I am unsure how much code relies upon iterator_range member size() function.
The codebase my colleagues and I manage makes heavy use of the boost range library. I do not think that a single line of code depends of size being a method of iterator_range. Actually, before reading this thread I assumed that boost::size would work via ADL extension points similar to boost::begin and boost::end. Even if it would break some code, it seems easy enough to replace the calls to the method size with calls to the function. We would trade some breaking tests for a better library any day (well, most days at least). Markus www.clean-cpp.org