on Sun Nov 23 2008, Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen-AT-dezide.com> wrote:
Dave Handley skrev:
I have looked it up, and its not documented. Period.
Anyway, I'm sorry you feel the way you do. I don't intentionally try to break people's code, and I have put an enourmous effort into the code I've submitted to boost.
FWIW, boost.range is not changing anymore.
Unfortunately, you've already broken my confidence - unless of course, we can come up with a decent compromise on this which seems further away by the hour.
If the compromise does not include going back to the old behavior for boost::iterator_range, then I'm open to suggestions (If we did that, how would we explain that situation to all those that want the current behavior?).
I think the best thing you can do at this point is: a. Write a good, complete transition guide that is included in the library docs, describing all the changes. b. Include an example that shows how to build your own iterator_range that has the old behavior. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com