On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:12:53 -0700, "Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website for Email)" <andrewalex@hotmail.com> wrote:
Or maybe we should just use
int cv[] = { 1, 2, 3 }; v.assign( cv, end(cv) );
That's cool. Then, what is the motivation of the initialization library?
in my experience i have to initialize STL containers only in extremely rare cases, so i don't need an initialization library, but if something allows me to write it in a way that resembles initialization i still want it -- because it's cool :O) my two cents on the operator debate: - people who know that "," is a sequence point will not get bitten by it, as they also tend to know that an overloaded "," is not a sequence point; and if they do get bitten, they deserve it -- library authors should know better, application developers intentionally relying on evaluation order are evil - people who don't know what a sequence point is theoretically will get bitten regardless of which operator is used here, and practically will not get bitten, not more frequently than in any other part of their code with any other operator (built-in or user-defined) imho the coding guideline was never valid, and operator "," is the best choice here br, andras