------=_Part_25_23542764.1398101266771
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hello.

I was wondering the other day whether boost non-standard containers and
iterator adaptors have been investigated for normalization for C++17.
I am speaking of:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_55_0/doc/html/container/non_standard_containers.html
and:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_55_0/libs/iterator/doc/index.html

and particularly:

   - flat [multi]map/set which will become more and more interesting due to
   the data locality and cache efficiency they provide (and in my application
   domain related to supercomputing, they will become a necessity)
   - filter iterator which are very convenient to iterate through element
   using a condition
   - permutation iterator that can provide iteration in a different order
   - zip iterator for synchronous iteration over a tuple of iterators

As I am not very aware of the history of all of these, is there a
fundamental reason to not propose them for C++17:

   - there is no sufficient interest for them
   - there is something wrong about their design
   - they will be superseeded by a new feature/approach that will be
   available in C++17 (so before considering them, we need C++17)
   - or simply... they were not proposed due to a lack of time (and such
   proposals will be greatly appreciated)
   - other reason ?

Thank you very much,

Vincent

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.

------=_Part_25_23542764.1398101266771
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Hello.<br><br>I was wondering the other day whether boost =
non-standard containers and iterator adaptors have been investigated for no=
rmalization for C++17.<br>I am speaking of:<br>http://www.boost.org/doc/lib=
s/1_55_0/doc/html/container/non_standard_containers.html<br>and:<br>http://=
www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_55_0/libs/iterator/doc/index.html<br><br>and parti=
cularly:<br><ul><li>flat [multi]map/set which will become more and more int=
eresting due to the data locality and cache efficiency they provide (and in=
 my application domain related to supercomputing, they will become a necess=
ity)<br></li><li>filter iterator which are very convenient to iterate throu=
gh element using a condition</li><li>permutation iterator that can provide =
iteration in a different order</li><li>zip iterator for synchronous iterati=
on over a tuple of iterators</li></ul><p>As I am not very aware of the hist=
ory of all of these, is there a fundamental reason to not propose them for =
C++17:</p><ul><li>there is no sufficient interest for them</li><li>there is=
 something wrong about their design</li><li>they will be superseeded by a n=
ew feature/approach that will be available in C++17 (so before considering =
them, we need C++17)</li><li>or simply... they were not proposed due to a l=
ack of time (and such proposals will be greatly appreciated)</li><li>other =
reason ?</li></ul><p>Thank you very much,</p><p>Vincent<br></p></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />

------=_Part_25_23542764.1398101266771--

.