a9397b74   
   From: brangdon@cix.co.uk   
      
   crusader.mike@gmail.com (Michael Kilburn) wrote (abridged):   
   > On Jan 21, 8:24 am, brang...@cix.co.uk (Dave Harris) wrote:   
   >> For_each is less like:   
   >>  for (auto i = c.begin(); i != c.end(); ++i)   
   >>      body( *i );   
   >>   
   >> and more like:   
   >>  for (auto i = c.begin(), e = c.end(); i != e; ++i)   
   >>      body( *i );   
   >>   
   >> The latter being so easy to write, and only slightly more   
   >> verbose, I don't think for_each has a big advantage here.   
   >   
   > You can't say that without knowing how complex end() function is.   
      
   With the second loop, it doesn't matter how complex end() is, because it   
   is only evaluated once (and cached in 'e'). That's the same as with   
   for_each, so I don't see how for_each has a big advantage in this   
   respect.   
      
   -- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.   
      
      
   --   
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)