From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-06 19:33:56
"Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Pavol Droba <droba_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 02:43:20PM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
>>>>> What would be the advantage? User can write iterator_range
>>>>> res=regex_maxch(...);
>>>>
>>>>Doesn't the match object get destroyed here, thereby invalidating the
>>>>iterators?
>>>>
>>>Not really as far as I know. Iterators are bound to the collection that is being searched,
>>>not to the match itself. Therfore, they validity should not be bound the lifetime
>>>of them match. They will be copied to the iterarator_range.
>> The match object *is* the collection (of submatches) being searched.
>>
>
>
> A sub-match is just a glorified pair of iterators. The iterators refer
> to the sequence being searched, which has a lifetime independent of
> the match object. There is no risk of iterator invalidation here.
I'm not worried about submatch's iterators over the original input
sequence, but about the match_results's iterators over submatches.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com