Marshall Clow-2 wrote:
1) [WANT] Could all/any/none/one_of_equal be made more general and merged with all/any/none/one_of by accepting a binary predicate via overloading?
template<typename InputIterator, typename UnaryPred> bool all_of ( InputIterator first, InputIterator last, Pred p );
template<typename InputIterator, typename BinaryPred, typename V> bool all_of ( InputIterator first, InputIterator last, BinaryPred p, V const& v );
I think that bind handles this for us: all_of ( first, last, bind ( pred, _1, v )) ?
Yes, of course but then why providing all/one/none/any_of_equal at all? Just provide C++11 _of with the addition of one_of and use bind: all_of(first, last bind(std::equal_to<V>(), _1, v)) // instead of all_of_equal BTW, if you stick with the _of_equal, why not providing more of them for operators other than == and calling them all/one/none/any_equal_to/_less/_greater/... to follow STL functional convention?
9) [WANT] Are these examples from the docs incorrect? (What's 3, 9, etc?)
one_of ( c.begin (), c.end (), 3 ) --> true one_of ( c, 3 ) --> true none_of ( c, 9 ) --> true any_of ( c.begin (), c.end (), 9 ) --> false
Right before these examples is: Examples: Given the container c containing { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 }, then
I guess I need to make that more noticeable.
I meant, don't you need a predicate here instead of 3, 9, etc? Thanks, --Lorenzo -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Review-Algorithms-My-review-of-Boost-Algo... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.