Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
the following question just shot through my head. For the c++ stl iterators, a common practice is to have something like:
for (iterator it=obj.begin(); it!=obj.end(); it++)
what I am wondering is actually that obj.begin() could have told “it” when to stop which would make the for loop look like:
for (iterator it=obj.begin(); !it.end(); it++)
The benefit would be to make the iterator more self contained, and one could save (iterator end()) in the container class.
If the iterator API would be designed like that, a pointer wouldn’t be a valid iterator (since a pointer obviously wouldn’t have an
end()) method. So that would rule out the most straight-forward way to implement iterators for data structures with contiguous memory.