RE: [boost] STL algorithm for containers (was Re: Re: boost/test/ detail/algorithm.hpp: request forpromotionand/or fast review)
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
Why don't we provide container versions of all stl algorithms:
template<typename C,typename P> inline for_each( C const& c, P pred) // or non const ref?? { // unwrap here used to allow by_ref( c ) usage for mutable predicates std::for_each( begin( unwrap( c ) ), end( unwrap( c ) ), P ); }
This depends who do you mean by "we" ;-) There's a bunch of container algorithms in the sandbox:
and I use them quite a lot.
- Volodya
Oh! I missed it somehow. Is there plans for review request? I would second it. Gennadiy.
| Oh! I missed it somehow. Is there plans for review request? I would second | it. not really. John Torjo is doing something similar though. br Thorsten
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
| Oh! I missed it somehow. Is there plans for review request? I would | second it.
not really. John Torjo is doing something similar though.
Frankly, I think this is deplorable situation. There's library which worked good enough for me. Now there's another library with similiar purpose. So, which one I (or anybody else) should use? I guess this is the case where several versions of the same thing are not good. BTW, Thorsten, why you say there are plans for review request? - Volodya
"Vladimir Prus" <ghost@cs.msu.su> wrote in message news:200405250950.54149.ghost@cs.msu.su... | Thorsten Ottosen wrote: | > | Oh! I missed it somehow. Is there plans for review request? I would | > | second it. | > | > not really. John Torjo is doing something similar though. | | Frankly, I think this is deplorable situation. actually we should think it is a good thing because it means that competing libraries have emerged and several designs have been discussed. | BTW, Thorsten, why you say there are [no] plans for review request? Well, I think what John is doing is slightly better. And he do intend to request a review. br Thorsten
participants (3)
-
Rozental, Gennadiy -
Thorsten Ottosen -
Vladimir Prus