Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 04:45:54PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
| >
| > | Are there any point in doing patches like this one?
| > |
| > | If so we should hunt for and kill over use of functions like this.
| >
| > This is a list of for-loops that might be changed to not call end() in
| > the test clause.
|
| Ah.. the 'end()' was the point. I thought the duplicated 'next' call...
The duplicated boost::next's as well.
as to the boost::next(foo.begin()) == foo.end()
I am fixing those.
--
Lgb
