"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
I guess the design could havebeen that way; but we don't say container< const T >::iterator to get container<T>::const_iterator.
Isn't range_iterator<R>::type the iterator type of the range R?
Yes, in a world where iterator and const_iterator are distinguished. [...]
My question is to be read as follows:
Is it not the design intent of range_iterator<R>::type to give the iterator type of the range R, so that I can write:
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.
I know, and I know what you meant. I just wanted to be accurate. Probably my overly-literal mind at "work" again. Sorry. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com