On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen@dezide.com> wrote:
I think the end result was an agreement that
typedef typename boost::make_unsigned< difference_type>::type size_type
would be a valid definition of size_type, so the only argument against making the change that I can see is breaking existing code (probably unlikely...?) and...inertia.
Well, its /not/ unlikely that it will break code.
I did not find authors of "Range" in the discussion. I am afraid your fix will be missed. It is good idea to write formal bug. Can you do it?
I think the most obvious reason we (probabl me) did it like that is that iterator traits have no notion of unsigned types.
Maybe you could you provide a new class, ptr_range? I'd derive from iterator_range, use ::std::size_t for size() and provide a data() member? It's only a partial solution. -- Olaf