"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Why? What other changes do you think are needed in order to make this consistent?
Because your change is unnecessary (just use range_result_iterator) and because it could potentially break code.
Anyway, now that you've reminded me of range_result_iterator, I'll be happy to roll back my change if this is breaking any code or if Thorsten asks me to.
I also object to patching someone else's code without permission unless that person is unreachable, which Thorsten is not. Had you checked first, he (or I) would have simply told you to use range_result_iterator.
Okay, you're right. My only excuse is a poor one, so I won't even bother ;-) Un-patching... -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com