Re: [boost] Re: making bind and mem_fn results default constructible?

Fredrik Blomqvist wrote:

Ah, well, my intention wasn't really to focus on transform_iterator, I just used it as an example.

Yes, I know. Me too.

Although I can see that you're right about it not being in sync with it's documentation. My point was that default-constructability would make creating _any_ kind of adaptor based on bind/mem_fn easier and more flexible.

I'm not sure I agree. Adding a default constructor that may create a singular object is, in my experience, a design mistake. Any component that requires such a constructor is broken. The main purpose of this constructor (again, IME) is to allow you to shoot yourself in the foot, as is frequently the case with the iterators.