On Thu, 30 Sept 2021 at 21:27, François Dumont via Libstdc++ <libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Here is the _Safe_iterator one. > > Doing so I noticed that pointer_traits rebind for __normal_iterator was > wrong and added tests on it.
Oops, thanks! > For _Safe_iterator maybe I should specialize only when instantiated with > __normal_iterator ? Or maybe limit to random_access_iterator_tag ? Yes, I think that's a good idea, maybe only for __normal_iterator<T*, C>. I think that should cover all the cases we actually need to support. And could you change the existing pointer_traits<__normal_iterator<I, C>> partial specialization to only be valid for __normal_iterator<T*,C> as well? i.e. only for __normal_iterator that wraps a pointer (which is true for string::iterator, vector::iterator etc.) > Whatever the pointer_to implementation is problematic, we can only > produce singular iterator as I did ifor now. Hmm, yes. I think that's OK, because I don't think anybody is actually going to use that function. What matters is that it works with std::__to_address for C++17 mode, and that doesn't depend on pointer_to, so it's OK if it doesn't work usefully. Thanks!
