This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
[RFC] Interpretation of DR 198 resolution
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
- To: libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, Nathan Myers <ncm at cantrip dot org>,Martin Sebor <sebor at roguewave dot com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:47:41 +0100
- Subject: [RFC] Interpretation of DR 198 resolution
Hi everyone!
I'm reading this old DR and its resolution [WP]:
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#198
The rationale points out that "... it is /not/ an issue about the
behavior of predefined iterators" but still I'm quite a lot worried
by the change to paragraph 1 of 24.4.1.3.3 [lib.reverse.iter.op.star]
from the current:
Iterator tmp = current;
return *--tmp;
that we are /closely/ following in our implementation, to
this->tmp = current;
--this->tmp;
return *this->tmp;
What does this really mean? Perhaps that we are entitled to have the
current implementation only provided we offer guarantees about the
validity of pointers and references after iterator destruction?
Anyone willing to shed some light on this?
Thanks,
Paolo.