[iterator] - does there exist an opposite of Function Output Iterator?
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_37_0/libs/iterator/doc/function_output_itera... Shows a unary function being adapted as an OutputIterator. Does Boost have something that does the opposite, i.e. takes an OutputIterator and adapts it as a unary function object? In my own code I currently have: template <typename OutputIterator> struct output_iterator_function { explicit output_iterator_function(OutputIterator i) : iter(i) { } template <typename T> void operator()(const T &v) { *iter++ = v; } OutputIterator iter; }; template <typename OutputIterator> output_iterator_function<OutputIterator> make_output_iterator_function(OutputIterator i) { return output_iterator_function<OutputIterator>(i); } If this doesn't already exist in Boost.Iterator, it seems like it would nicely complement the already existing function_output_iterator. --Michael Fawcett
AMDG Michael Fawcett wrote:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_37_0/libs/iterator/doc/function_output_itera...
Shows a unary function being adapted as an OutputIterator. Does Boost have something that does the opposite, i.e. takes an OutputIterator and adapts it as a unary function object?
In my own code I currently have:
<snip>
using namespace boost::lambda; *var(i)++ = _1; ? In Christ, Steven Watanabe
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Steven Watanabe
Michael Fawcett wrote:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_37_0/libs/iterator/doc/function_output_itera...
Shows a unary function being adapted as an OutputIterator. Does Boost have something that does the opposite, i.e. takes an OutputIterator and adapts it as a unary function object?
using namespace boost::lambda; *var(i)++ = _1;
Thanks, as always, Steven. While clever, Boost.Lamba seems like overkill for this extremely simple task. Is it your experience that it would generate code as efficient as what I originally posted? Do you feel that such functionality doesn't belong in Boost.Iterator? I think it nicely complements function_output_iterator. --Michael Fawcett
on Thu Feb 05 2009, Michael Fawcett
Thanks, as always, Steven.
While clever, Boost.Lamba seems like overkill for this extremely simple task. Is it your experience that it would generate code as efficient as what I originally posted?
Should be easily as efficient.
Do you feel that such functionality doesn't belong in Boost.Iterator?
I definitely think it doesn't. Boost.Iterator is about constructing iterators. You're constructing a function. Boost.Lambda or Bind or Pheonix are the right tools for that job.
I think it nicely complements function_output_iterator.
Then maybe function_output_iterator ought to be moved into the lambda lib ;-) -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:47 PM, David Abrahams
on Thu Feb 05 2009, Michael Fawcett
wrote: Do you feel that such functionality doesn't belong in Boost.Iterator?
I definitely think it doesn't. Boost.Iterator is about constructing iterators. You're constructing a function. Boost.Lambda or Bind or Pheonix are the right tools for that job.
Right, it doesn't belong in Boost.Iterator.
I think it nicely complements function_output_iterator.
Then maybe function_output_iterator ought to be moved into the lambda lib ;-)
I only meant it seemed nice to have the converse available in the same form, not as a lamba construct. I'll stick with my little solution for now. --Michael Fawcett
participants (3)
-
David Abrahams -
Michael Fawcett -
Steven Watanabe