opApply Vs. Ranges: What should take precedence?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:12:52 -0500, dsimcha <dsimcha at yahoo.com> wrote:

> == Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schveiguy at yahoo.com)'s article
>> My Tree implementation iterates over all the
>> elements without recursion.
>
> Yes, but looking at your implementation, you have parent pointers, which  
> are
> necessary anyhow for RB trees.  This makes it easier.  If you aren't  
> using an RB
> tree, storing parent pointers counts as an inefficiency.  So does  
> requiring a heap
> allocation for an explicit stack every time a range object is created.

Ah yes, you are right.  Good point.  A range is impossible on such a  
container without an allocated stack.

>> To answer the original question -- opApply should be chosen, and this is
>> not debatable.  There is only *one* purpose for opApply -- to hook onto
>> foreach.  If you defined both opApply and equivalent range functions and
>> range functions where chosen first, opApply would be wasted code.
>
> Agreed.  I'm starting to think that this is enough of a slam-dunk to go  
> in Bugzilla.

You mean opApply is not preferred?  If so, it definitely should go in  
bugzilla.  When I see it, I'll vote it up.

-Steve