3 May
2005
3 May
'05
4:31 p.m.
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
I guess the design could havebeen that way; but we don't say container< const T >::iterator to get container<T>::const_iterator.
I'm not sure how did container<T const> enter the picture. Isn't range_iterator<R>::type the iterator type of the range R? Isn't it the return type of r.begin(), where r is of type R (in the typical container case)? Doesn't r.begin() return R::const_iterator when R is const?