On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote: > But what is that `unified range concept'? And why do we need it? See Boost.Range for the concept and possibly uses. There has been some discussion to accept it in the standard, IIRC.
> Exactly. Which for me means, it must be simple. Simple to learn, > simple to use, simple to teach. The range-for as it is specified in this thread *is* simple to learn use and teach. Not so easy to implement, but not so hard either. I am merely pointing out that strictly emulating the range-for behavior is far from trivial. > BTW, if you are trying to change the specification is gcc-patches > the appropriate place to discuss that? I have no intention to specify anything, I'm just suggesting that it would be nice to have a library function that does this. And this is not gcc-patches@ but gcc@: "Anything relevant to the development or testing of GCC and not covered by other mailing lists is suitable for discussion here." -- Rodrigo
