David Abrahams wrote:
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
[what's a mono-sequence?] The opposite of hetero-sequence :P
A mono-sequence is the opposite of a multi-sequence. The opposite of a hetero-sequence is a homo-sequence.
Oh my, yeah. I thought all along that was what I typed! Must still be sleepy, or cross-eyed, or both :P
It's not the same thing at all. In the case of array<int>, the sequence has the same elements in either case; we're just talking about two ways of accessing the same sequence. In the case of std::pair there are two completely distinct interpretations, either of which could be valid. In my case I think there are only two possible choices:
1. say that std::pair needs to be wrapped or otherwise transformed before I know how to treat it.
[...]
* Boost.Range and Boost.Fusion both interpret an int*[4] as a sequence of 4 values of type int*. Consistent
* Boost.Fusion interprets a pair<int*,int*> as a sequence of two values of type int*.
* Boost.Range interprets a pair<int*,int*> x as a sequence of x.second-x.first values of type int.
Oh man, Now I see the problem. Pardon my slowness!!! Well, it seems, this interpretation of Boost.Range for pair<T*,T*> (or in general, std::pair<iterator,iterator> is at the very least suspicious. If we all agree that pair<T,T> is a tuple (a sequence in Fusion's sense), then pair<T*,T*> shouldn't be any different. I'd say that treating std::pair<iterator,iterator> as a runtime sequence is the wrong generalization. Cheers, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net