Oliver Kullmann <O.Kullmann@swansea.ac.uk> writes:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 10:27:53AM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> writes:
Not really; especially if you show the "as-if" implementation of boost::begin. But more importantly, as far as I can tell from the code, that *is* the actual requirement! Otherwise, standard containers don't satisfy the concept. It doesn't matter how strange it seems if the alternative is inaccurate.
I don't think that the requirement should be
boost::begin(v);
since functions cannot be partially specialised, and only the overload mechanism together with ADL is available to use a user-defined begin-function. In cases like this I regard the requirement
using boost::begin; begin(v);
as the correct one:
- now standard containers fulfil the requirement; - and used-defined versions of begin are taken into account.
boost::begin is defined to look up a user-defined function via ADL. This was extensively discussed on the mailing list. I'm not saying one is a better approach than another, just that you're coming in late on an issue that's been considered. My post is not about what the requirement ought to be; it's about how to document the requirement that is already there in the code. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com