Andrew Webber wrote:
I recently set out to evaluate boost::date_time for use in a large commercial project. I was extremely impressed with the large feature-set and the obvious depth of thought put into the library.
Thx :-)
However, I was a little upset about some small features missing from day_iterator, month_iterator, and year_iterator. Specifically, I wished for equality, inequality, post-increment and post-decrement operators. The inequality operator in particular would add the ability to use this group of iterators with many of the standard algorithms such as std::copy.
This has been on the todo list for way to long...
I'm very new to the boost developers mailing list, so please forgive me and inform me if I'm breaking protocol in some way here.
Not at all.
I went ahead and implemented the missing iterator operators. Interestingly, because the design of the iterators, the equality and inequality operators work between different types of iterators (day, month or year). I've also added some demo code to test out the new features. It's definitely not a unit test, but at least you can see that the operators are working. I've successfully compiled the new boost::date_time code and demo code under Visual Studio .NET 2003. If I have time, I will also test the code on gcc 3.4 and gcc 4.0.
...snip details...
Is this something that may be considered for inclusion in the date_time library?
Absolutely -- patches are always the best way to get something into the library :-) I think there's actually a couple more things to get the iterators up to full compliance, but I have no problem moving things along. So I'll check your fixes into the head...probably be a month or so before I get the cycles to do the work. Thx! Jeff