From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-02 08:43:33
"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:ullft2bnb.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
> | "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> | > So my personal feeling is that collection.html is redundant now.
> |
> | It's not redundant until you make all the code that relies on it work
> | with models of the more-general Range.
>
> what code?
For example, the Multi Array library uses the collection concept. In
addition to code, you'd need to update the docs.
> | Sounds like Collection is a
> | refinement of Range.
>
> well, I dropped the external/internal concept definitions in the
> range docs, so currently ranges are defined by free-standing
> functions and metafunctions and not members.
If you have generalized free-standing functions/metafunctions that
work for STL collections, they should work for the Collection concept
too. No?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com