okay cool. I think that's a reasonable compromise. It should also (hopefully) make it possible to move away from the indexing suite as well.<br><br>thanks for your help!<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 16 August 2011 21:41, Jim Bosch <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:talljimbo@gmail.com">talljimbo@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="h5">On 08/16/2011 11:29 AM, Babak Khataee wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Okay thanks for the info.<br>
<br>
Things are also a lot safer if you only wrap vectors as const; it's<br>
exposing the mutators to Python that gets really difficult.<br>
<br>
<br>
Is the const-ness of a wrapped object just a side effect of not exposing<br>
methods which modify it or is it due to something else more explicit ?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
The former. It's really only the methods that can invalidate iterators (i.e. those that add or remove elements) that you need to worry about. Non-const access to individual elements is totally safe on its own.<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
Jim<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>