From: Doug Gregor (dgregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-19 13:43:33
On Monday 19 July 2004 1:05 pm, Guillaume Melquiond wrote:
> Now I think I have a correct solution. And I finally understood what the
> original code was doing; it would have been correct if there was an
> additional line in the adjacency triangular matrix. Indeed the iterator
> didn't try to stop on the first element outside the matrix but on the
> first line outside the matrix.
Oh, that makes sense.
> So the patch I now submit transforms the edge iterator so that the end
> iterator doesn't go so far but stop at the end of the matrix. It
> involves a special casing in the increment of the iterator so that it
> doesn't try to reach far outside the matrix.
Looks good.
> In the middle of the patch also lies my correction for the const-ness
> problem of the get_edge function I was explaining in the previous mail.
This looks fine, too.
Thanks! Check it in whatever you'd like.
> PPS: As a side note, I think the iterator could be made smaller by
> removing the m_inc variable and replacing it by m_targ since they are
> equivalent on the second half of the road and m_inc is not used on the
> first half. But it is a story for another time.
Another time, yes. I'd like to hold off on this type of change until after
1.32.0 is out there.
Doug