Sturla Molden wrote:
> Den 19.02.2012 01:12, skrev Nathaniel Smith:
>>
>> I don't oppose it, but I admit I'm not really clear on what the
>> supposed advantages would be. Everyone seems to agree that
>> -- Only a carefully-chosen subset of C++ features should be used
>> -- But this subset would be pretty useful
>> I wonder if anyone is actually thinking of the same subset :-).
>
> Probably not, everybody have their own favourite subset.
>
>
>>
>> Chuck mentioned iterators as one advantage. I don't understand, since
>> iterators aren't even a C++ feature, they're just objects with "next"
>> and "dereference" operators. The only difference between these is
>> spelling:
>> for (my_iter i = foo.begin(); i != foo.end(); ++i) { ... }
>> for (my_iter i = my_iter_begin(foo); !my_iter_ended(&i);
>> my_iter_next(&i)) { ... }
>> So I assume he's thinking about something more, but the discussion has
>> been too high-level for me to figure out what.
>
>
I find range interface (i.e., boost::range) is far more useful than raw
iterator
interface. I always write all my algorithms using this abstraction.
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
