Hi Lars,
Funny that you are doing the exact same changes as my original patch
fixing the code to use std::distance and std::advance (in this case
boost::next). You rejected my patch exactly because of this... I am not
upset but you could have told me at the beginning instead of letting me
wasting my time.
Concerning the direct access if you want to continue this way, for sure,
list::iterator must be replaced if you want speed. With direct access
where it make sense, you would have gained much speed. Right now you
still have a lot of direct access all over the code, are you going to
fix that?
Abdel.
Lars Gullik Bjønnes a écrit :
Ok, this is what I am going to commit.
I am not really happy with the fact that RandomListIterator really is
a std::list<>::iterator. I'd like it to be a real
random_access_iterator. We should probably create our own. (And no; I
don't agree that we should only work with offsets and indices,
iterators are nice and we should use them.)
This works for me.
