llvm dev - Dec 2017 - Extending llvm::iterator_range

Hello,

Our llvm::iterator_range is quite minimalist in design, it does not even
have an "empty" method.
Is that because we want it to work on all iterators (including those dirty
OutputIterator)?

Maybe we can add a little bit to it?

I recently needed:
- bool empty()
- value_type& font()
- value_type& back()
- void advance_begin(difference_type n)
- void advance_end(difference_type n)

Would you be open to those?

-- 
*Alexandre Isoard*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171211/962ff1d2/attachment.html>

I'd prefer not to add these to iterator_range itself, but as free functions
so they work on any range, including arrays, etc.

the advance_* ones, (is that the canonical/common name for those? I'd have
guessed 'slice') could be free functions over arbitrary ranges that
return
iterator ranges, perhaps (though that gets into tricky territory,
admittedly - lifetime expectations, views versus concrete/value ranges, etc)

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:30 PM Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Our llvm::iterator_range is quite minimalist in design, it does not even
> have an "empty" method.
> Is that because we want it to work on all iterators (including those dirty
> OutputIterator)?
>
> Maybe we can add a little bit to it?
>
> I recently needed:
> - bool empty()
> - value_type& font()
> - value_type& back()
> - void advance_begin(difference_type n)
> - void advance_end(difference_type n)
>
> Would you be open to those?
>
> --
> *Alexandre Isoard*
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171212/ed5184a0/attachment.html>

I'm taking inspiration from those:

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_53_0/libs/range/doc/html/
range/reference/utilities/iterator_range.html

To me, "slice" would cut the range (intuitively). But I'm not an
English
native.

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:33 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'd prefer not to add these to iterator_range itself, but as free
> functions so they work on any range, including arrays, etc.
>
> the advance_* ones, (is that the canonical/common name for those? I'd
have
> guessed 'slice') could be free functions over arbitrary ranges that
return
> iterator ranges, perhaps (though that gets into tricky territory,
> admittedly - lifetime expectations, views versus concrete/value ranges,
etc)
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:30 PM Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Our llvm::iterator_range is quite minimalist in design, it does not
even
>> have an "empty" method.
>> Is that because we want it to work on all iterators (including those
>> dirty OutputIterator)?
>>
>> Maybe we can add a little bit to it?
>>
>> I recently needed:
>> - bool empty()
>> - value_type& font()
>> - value_type& back()
>> - void advance_begin(difference_type n)
>> - void advance_end(difference_type n)
>>
>> Would you be open to those?
>>
>> --
>> *Alexandre Isoard*
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>

-- 
*Alexandre Isoard*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171212/4cdb1b08/attachment.html>