[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-689?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12572761#action_12572761
]
vitek edited comment on STDCXX-689 at 2/26/08 6:17 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
It seems that changing this would introduce a source incompatibility.
{noformat}
std::vector<int> v;
std::vector<int>::iterator vi = v.begin();
vi == v.end(); // also for !=, <, <=, >, >= and -
{noformat}
The above code would compile with new versions of the library, but not with
older versions of the library. Is this change suitable for 4.2.1? It seems that
it should not be.
As an aside, I'm with John Potter on wg issues 179 and 280... ??I think the
issue is in support of bad code. Compares should be between two iterators of
the same type.??
was (Author: vitek):
It seems that changing this would introduce a source incompatibility.
std::vector<int> v;
std::vector<int>::iterator vi = v.begin();
vi == v.end(); // also for !=, <, <=, >, >= and -
The above code would compile with new versions of the library, but not with
older versions of the library. Is this change suitable for 4.2.1? It seems that
it should not be.
As an aside, I'm with John Potter on wg issues 179 and 280... ??I think the
issue is in support of bad code. Compares should be between two iterators of
the same type.??
> [LWG #280] std::reverse_iterator missing template assignment operator
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STDCXX-689
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-689
> Project: C++ Standard Library
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: 24. Iterators
> Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4, 4.2.0
> Reporter: Martin Sebor
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 4.2.1
>
> Original Estimate: 2h
> Remaining Estimate: 2h
>
> LWG Issue 280 added a template assignment operator to reverse_iterator:
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#280
> It doesn't look like we ever added the function.
> I'm having trouble coming up with a test case that would reveal its absence
> so this is just a placeholder to remind us to look into this in more detail
> to make sure the function really is needed (if not, there's no need to
> complicate the interface of the template).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
