"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message news:d5ot7b$5d9$1@sea.gmane.org... | [My email to Thorsten bounced, so I'm posting it here] ok, any idea why? [did you use nesotto@cs.aau.dk or nesotto@cs.auc.dk?] the former is the new one. | Thorsten, | | I finally got around to Boost.Range today. Sorry for the long delay. thankyou for doing it! | I've been able to get all the regression tests to pass on VC6, and all the tests | to compile on VC7.0. I can't run the tests on the latter platform because of | errors in Boost.Test. | | There are two points which deserve mention: | | 1. Array support only works for arrays of fundamental types. This should be | mentioned in the docs, since it's not apparent from the regression test results. ok, I'll mention that | 2. With VC6, the function template arguments to range_end<>::fun() and | range_size_<>::fun() were not deduced properly, leading to compiler errors. | Since explicitly specifying the arguments caused internal errors, I used a trick | from iostreams, and put the static function fun() in a nested class template | whose template argument can be explicitly specified without problem; e.g.: | | template<> | struct range_end<std_container_> | { | template< typename C > | struct inner { | static BOOST_RANGE_DEDUCED_TYPENAME | range_result_iterator<C>::type | fun( C& c ) | { | return c.end(); | }; | }; | }; | | .... | | template< typename C > | inline BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME range_result_iterator<C>::type | end( C& c ) | { | return range_detail::range_end<range_detail::range<C>::type>:: | inner<C>::fun( c ); | } Don't you need BOOST_NESTED_TEMPLATE before "inner"? | This workaround is applied only for VC6. My question is: does this interfere | with the extension protocol? If so, I think I can fix it, but only by adding | another level of indirection. I don't think it interferes...extending the lib portably is really hard if the type is a class template. | If you approve, I'll commit these changes. please do. | I haven't started working on Borland | or GCC 2.9x yet. You're gonna do those too. :-) -Thorsten