10 May
2005
10 May
'05
7:37 p.m.
Eric Niebler wrote:
But users might reasonably expect this:
int i = 0; for( i : vect ) { } // maybe use i here
to use the pre-declared i as a loop variable instead of introducing a new variable.
Good point.
That's an important use case, ...
I don't believe that it is an important use case at all, but it is nevertheless a showstopper. It would be very confusing to overload 'for' in a way that is not consistent with its traditional semantics. We'll have to live with auto or auto&, as appropriate.