Iterator "convertable to" problem
Martin Sebor
sebor@roguewave.com
Fri Sep 17 16:47:00 GMT 2004
chris jefferson wrote:
...
> Does this seem to be a correct reading of the standard? Do we need nasty
> static_casts all over the place?
A pedantic reading of the standard would suggest that you do in
fact need something like that in a number of other contexts as
well (e.g., in predicate tests). There was a discussion of this
problem on the reflector some time ago (see the thread starting
with c++std-lib-10365(*)). The prevailing opinion was that even
though nothing in the standard disallows such "subversive"
operators it has never been the intent to require implementations
to deal with them. Most people didn't think it was worth the
trouble to add text to disallow them.
Martin
* Use c++std-ping@accu.org to retrieve archived messages.
More information about the Libstdc++
mailing list