From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-08 11:57:19
On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 03:06:02 -0600, Aleksey Gurtovoy
<agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>Gennaro Prota wrote:
>> However, if we agree that when having autonomous next/prior we will
>> only use them to access next/prior< .. >::type and that the user
>> *must* specialize them for everything else
>
>Nope, we don't. This should work out-of-box:
>
> struct her_iterator
> {
> typedef /* unspecified */ next;
> };
>
> typedef mpl::next<her_iterator>::type t;
Ah! I thought next and prior were only meant as
"next_value"/"prior_value" and appliable only to types modeling some
numeric concept. I thought for iterators there was something like
"increment<>" and "decrement<>".
In (partial) justification of the mistake I can only say that the
documentation of next and prior in the 1.29.0 release is practically
blank.
Genny.