64 lines
2.6 KiB
ReStructuredText
64 lines
2.6 KiB
ReStructuredText
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
Problem with ``reference`` and old/new iterator category correspondance
|
|
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
|
|
.. _N1550: http://www.boost-consulting.com/writing/n1550.html
|
|
.. _N1530: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2003/n1530.html
|
|
|
|
:Author: David Abrahams and Jeremy Siek
|
|
:Contact: dave@boost-consulting.com, jsiek@osl.iu.edu
|
|
:Organization: `Boost Consulting`_, Indiana University Bloomington
|
|
:date: $Date$
|
|
:Copyright: Copyright David Abrahams, Jeremy Siek 2003. Use, modification and
|
|
distribution is subject to the Boost Software License,
|
|
Version 1.0. (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy
|
|
at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
|
|
|
|
.. _`Boost Consulting`: http://www.boost-consulting.com
|
|
|
|
==============
|
|
Introduction
|
|
==============
|
|
|
|
The new iterator categories are intended to correspond to the old
|
|
iterator categories, as specified in a diagram in N1550_. For example,
|
|
an iterator categorized as a mutable Forward Iterator under the old
|
|
scheme is now a Writable, Lvalue, and Foward Traversal iterator.
|
|
However, there is a problem with this correspondance, the new iterator
|
|
categories place requirements on the ``iterator_traits<X>::reference``
|
|
type whereas the standard iterator requirements say nothing about the
|
|
``reference`` type . In particular, the new Readable Iterator
|
|
requirements say that the return type of ``*a`` must be
|
|
``iterator_traits<X>::reference`` and the Lvalue Iterator requirements
|
|
says that ``iterator_traits<X>::reference`` must be ``T&`` or ``const
|
|
T&``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
====================
|
|
Proposed Resolution
|
|
====================
|
|
|
|
Change the standard requirements to match the requirements of the new
|
|
iterators. (more details to come)
|
|
|
|
|
|
==========
|
|
Rationale
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
The lack of specification in the standard of the ``reference`` type is
|
|
certainly a defect. Without specification, it is entirely useless in a
|
|
generic function. The current practice in the community is generally
|
|
to assume there are requirements on the ``reference`` type, such as
|
|
those proposed in the new iterator categories.
|
|
|
|
There is some danger in *adding* requirements to existing concepts.
|
|
This will mean that some existing iterator types will no longer meet
|
|
the iterator requirements. However, we feel that the impact of this is
|
|
small enough to warrant going ahead with this change.
|
|
|
|
An alternative solution would be to leave the standard requirements as
|
|
is, and to remove the requirements for the ``reference`` type in the
|
|
new iterator concepts. We are not in favor of this approach because it
|
|
extends what we see as a defect further into the future.
|