"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:427903CB.4060808@boost-consulting.com... | | Peter Dimov wrote: | > template<class R> void f( R & r ) | > { | > typename range_iterator<R>::type i = r.begin(); | > } | > | > and hence, is it not perfectly logical for it to return | > C::const_iterator for R == C const? | > | > It was meant to support your point. | | | My understanding of the current design is that this is the purpose of | range_result_iterator, so I would rewrite your code as: | | template<class R> void f( R & r ) | { | typename range_result_iterator<R>::type i = r.begin(); | } | | range_iterator always evaluates to R::iterator regardless of the | const-ness of R, and range_const_iterator always evaluates to | R::const_iterator. | | In my experience with Boost.Range, I have found range_result_iterator to | be useful. I have found little need for range_iterator and | range_const_iterator. YMMV. this is a good point; we mostly just need range_result_iterator<T> so it could just be spelled range::iterator<T>. -Thorsten