Hi Paul, excuse my late anwering, ----- Mensaje original ----- De: Paul Rose <prose@batstrading.com> Fecha: Viernes, Junio 8, 2007 11:15 pm Asunto: Re: [boost] [multi_index] use cases for iterator_to() Para: boost@lists.boost.org

...

...

I guess I'l finally include it, but it'd be so much nicer if we couldfind a conclusive use case. I've also thought about legacy interfaces requiring raw pointers, if only we could come up with a simple specific scenario on that line.

Hi,

Occasionally I want this feature, but admittedly for a fairly weak reason:

Checking for NULL:

if(p) ...

is more convenient than checking for end:

if(i == c.end()) ...

If most of the time I need only to check for NULL or dereference then a pointer is more convenient. When I occasionally need to erase() then I can use iterator_to...

Well, it is definitely not the intention of this feature to promote the use of pointers instead of iterators :) the latter are richer types and can detect problems in your code both at compile time (vg. adding an offset to a bidirectional iterator) and at run time (vg. via Boost.MultiIndex safe mode). iterator_to() would be oriented to very specific uses, for instance when needed because of requirements from legacy APIs as Bruno suggests. In which sense is the use of pointers rather than iterators "more convenient"? Thank you, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo