From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-03 11:31:02
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> I guess the design could havebeen that way; but we don't say
> container< const T >::iterator to get container<T>::const_iterator.
I'm not sure how did container<T const> enter the picture. Isn't
range_iterator<R>::type the iterator type of the range R? Isn't it the
return type of r.begin(), where r is of type R (in the typical container
case)? Doesn't r.begin() return R::const_iterator when R is const?