From -7413078336262946692 X-Google-Thread: 7894ca11fe,b8f03ff37c64f88c,start X-Google-Attributes: gid7894ca11fe,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.alt.net!frodo.cs.rpi.edu!not-for-mail From: Scott Meyers Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: No cbegin/cend for std::initializer_list? Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 12:39:58 CST Organization: unknown Lines: 22 Sender: cppmods@cs.rpi.edu Approved: austern@google.com Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20090901101108.063e9c28@aristeia.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: netlab.cs.rpi.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: (Usenet) Return-Path: X-Original-Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 10:18:27 -0700 X-Submission-Address: std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.std.c++:1332 The initializer_list spec in N2914 provides iterators via begin/end, but it fails to offer cbegin/cend. There is no loss of functionality here, because begin/end return const_iterators, but offering cbegin/cend would make it easier to write generic code and would encourage people to develop a habit of using cbegin/cend when they perform iterators that don't mutate the elements being iterated over. Is there a reason not to add cbegin/cend to iterator_list? As an aside, iterator list declares typedefs for iterator and const_iterator, but it doesn't use them in the specification of begin/end, which are spec'd to return raw pointers. This seem, um, less than ideal. Scott -- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]