From: Yitzhak Sapir (yitzhaks_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-14 10:27:21
That is good to know in and of itself. Thanks again. I went and looked
it up, and even followed on to 299. I've been wondering about these
issues for a long time. Thank you.
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 07:58 AM 10/14/2002, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
>
> >Furthermore, using the same logic, it is possible to claim, based on
> >24.4.1.3.3 (operator* definition for a reverse iterator), which states
> (in
> >the document I'm looking at):
> > Effects: Iterator tmp = current;
> > return *--tmp;
>
> That text was replaced by DR 198. The new text follows:
>
> Effects:
>
> this->tmp = current;
> --this->tmp;
> return *this->tmp;
>
> [Note: This operation must use an auxiliary member variable, rather
> than a temporary variable, to avoid returning a reference that
> persists beyond the lifetime of its associated iterator. (See 24.1
> [lib.iterator.requirements].) The name of this member variable is
> shown for exposition only. --end note]
>
> Note that I'm not commenting on the discussion, which I haven't been
> following closely. Just pointing out that quoted text has changed.
>
> --Beman