On 2012-07-10 19:55, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Clearly this and any documentation can be improved, but I'd say if it
says "range" there there's no assumption "sorted range" there. I think
the main thing that could be expressed better is "unique consecutive".
Fair enough.
I think it would be onerous to mention for each algorithm, although
clearly they all are generic, that they can handle ranges with any
element type.
You see how stupid that is.
That being what?
I was trying to point out that one cannot assume how a function behaves
just by looking at one example. Specially not a template function.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
