From: jon_bills AT hotmail DOT com (Jon Bills)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: More out from "cout"....
Date: 8 Oct 2001 11:36:33 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <38315c2d.0110081036.48deb120@posting.google.com>
References: <9pque5$eui$1 AT tron DOT sci DOT fi> <38315c2d DOT 0110080044 DOT 40ead28d AT posting DOT google DOT com> <9ps443$hv$1 AT tron DOT sci DOT fi>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.7.106.224
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1002566194 30495 127.0.0.1 (8 Oct 2001 18:36:34 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Oct 2001 18:36:34 GMT
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

"Traveler" <traveler AT netti DOT fi> wrote in message news:<9ps443$hv$1 AT tron DOT sci DOT fi>...
> > What's wrong with using a vector and for each()?
> > 
> > Jon.
> 
> Show me the way you do it ....

Try looking up for_each(). Cameron also pointed out that the
ostream_iterator can be used for writing to an output stream.

> If it?s less clumsy than mine and works for every damn new class 
> declared then your?s is better :)

I'm not interested in whether you think my way is better or not. What
matters to me is that I do not find it useful to overload operators to
do surprising things, particularly when there is a perfectly
acceptable library feature that fulfils the need (and is far more
flexible).

> 
> traveler AT netti DOT fi

Jon.