On 26 August 2012 00:33, Ulrich Drepper <drep...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> > wrote: >> Personally, assuming the name itself is already reserved / used elsewhere, > > That was my thinking as well. There shouldn't be any further namespace > problem. > > >> .. another preliminary comment of mine: why not using iterators to specify >> those ranges, instead of plain pointers? Aren't the forward iterators >> generally Ok, like for std::fill itself? > > Does it really add anything worth? I used pointers because one of the > other extensions I'll submit really needs pointers because more than > one value is stored at once. > > Also, one uses these interfaces to achieve performance. In no > situation would you store the numbers in a non-sequential way since > this means cache misses.
But iterators don't have to imply non-sequential storage. Using iterators instead of pointers would allow you to store them in a std::deque, for example, or in a std::vector using std::back_insert_iterator.
