On 25 March 2011 14:22, Rodrigo Rivas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Yes but it's too late to specify it in C++0x.
>>
>> Boost.Range is the best place to work on that idea at present.
>> If/when it's fully baked I hope we'll see something like that in a
>> future TR or standard.
>
> Agreed.
> But just now, how would you explain if the following to loops behave
> differently?
>
> template<typename T> void foo(T &t)
> {
> for (auto i : t)
> ;
> for (auto i : boost::any_range(t))
> ;
> }
>
> Because the boost::any_range constructor is unable to replicate the
> logic from the range-for?
I would say different behaviour is better than an unpreventable
compiler error, which is what happened when combining range-based for
and Boost.Range a few months ago.
