From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-10 18:38:41
On 02/01/2005 07:28 AM, Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
> I think that one major problem is that you promise next<> and prev<> on
> integrals. It would be quite problematic to satisfy this for enums staying
> in the same enum type.
In the sandbox vault, there's range_all.zip which, IFAICT, solves this
problem by having a separate class, range_c_max, for including the
max value in the enumeration. Also next<> and prev<> have been
specialized as well as integral_rank. In addition, files in aux_/
preprocessed/gcc had to be modified by supplying an explicit
cast from an integral to the enumeration.
Anyway, the tests provided are for size and for_each (which
actually iterates over the whole enumeration). Also, mpl::minus
had to be specialized for size to work.
Comments and suggested improvements are welcome.