> Now that we're in C++, I think we should be using iterators that are much
> more in the style of libstdc++. I agree that the .next interface used here
> is a bit confusing.
>
> I'd expect to see something like
>
> for (bit_field_mode_iterator i(x,y,z); i ; ++i)
> {
> enum machine_mode mode = *i;
> ...
> }
I pondered on that for half an hour. :-) But the amount of stuff you need to
write to make it work in this particular case will make the implementation
convoluted and bloated for no obvious gains IMO.
--
Eric Botcazou
