diff --git a/doc/faq.html b/doc/faq.html index 7ae9f6a..34304ef 100755 --- a/doc/faq.html +++ b/doc/faq.html @@ -20,36 +20,36 @@

FAQ

  1. - Why is there no difference between range_iterator<C>::type + Why is there no difference between range_iterator<C>::type and range_const_iterator<C>::type for std::pair<iterator, iterator>.

    2. - In general it is not possible nor desirable to find a corresponding const_iterator. - When it is possible to come up with one, the client might choose to construct a std::pair<const_iterator,const_iterator> + In general it is not possible nor desirable to find a corresponding const_iterator. + When it is possible to come up with one, the client might choose to construct a std::pair<const_iterator,const_iterator> object.

    - Note that an iterator_range - is somewhat more convenient than a pair and that a sub_range do + Note that an iterator_range + is somewhat more convenient than a pair and that a sub_range does propagate const-ness.

    - +
  2. Why is there not supplied more types or more functions?

    - The library has been kept small because its current interface will + The library has been kept small because its current interface will serve most - purposes. If and when a genuine need arises for more functionality, it can be + purposes. If and when a genuine need arises for more functionality, it can be implemented.

  3. How should I implement generic algorithms for ranges?

    - One should always start with a generic algorithm that takes two iterators (or - more) as input. Then use Boost.Range to build handier versions on top of the - iterator based algorithm. Please notice that once the range version of the - algorithm is done, it makes sense not to expose the iterator version in + One should always start with a generic algorithm that takes two iterators (or + more) as input. Then use Boost.Range to build handier versions on top of the + iterator based algorithm. Please notice that once the range version of the + algorithm is done, it makes sense not to expose the iterator version in the public interface.

    4. @@ -57,59 +57,59 @@ Why is there no Incrementable Range concept?

    Even though we speak of incrementable iterators, it would not make - much sense for ranges; for example, we cannot determine the size and - emptiness of a range since we cannot even compare - its iterators. + much sense for ranges; for example, we cannot determine the size and + emptiness of a range since we cannot even compare + its iterators.

    - Note also that incrementable iterators are derived from output + Note also that incrementable iterators are derived from output iterators and so there exist no output range.

    - + + -->