subramanian100in@yahoo.com, India wrote:
Quote:
Consider the following program:
>
#include <iostream>
#include <map>
#include <string>
#include <utility>
#include <algorithm>
>
using namespace std;
>
int main()
{
map<string, intsi;
>
string word;
>
while (cin >word)
++si[word];
>
multimap<int, stringis;
Note that this is a non-const object.
Quote:
>
for (map<string, int>::const_iterator i = si.begin(); i != si.end(); +
+i)
is.insert(make_pair(i->second, i->first));
>
for (multimap<int, string>::const_reverse_iterator r = is.rbegin(); r !
= is.rend(); ++r)
Note that is.rend() returns reverse_iterator and not const_reverse_iterator
since "is" is a non-const object. Thus, you compare
const_reverse_iterate != reverse_iterator
Quote:
cout << r->second << " " << r->first << endl;
>
return 0;
}
>
Under g++, I get compilation error for the line
>
for (multimap<int, string>::const_reverse_iterator r = is.rbegin(); r !
= is.rend(); ++r)
>
The actual error message is
>
error: no match for 'operator!=' in 'r != std::multimap<_Key, _Tp,
_Compare, _Alloc>::rend() [with _Key = int, _Tp = std::string,
_Compare = std::less<int>, _Alloc = std::allocator<std::pair<const
int, std::string]()'
Yup. That's what you get.
Quote:
However this program compiles fine under VC++ 2005 Express Edition.
>
I use the following compilation command under g++.
>
g++ -std=c++98 -pedantic -Wall -Wextra word_count.cpp
It's a matter which STL implementation you use.
Quote:
Kindly explain why I am getting error for the above mentioned line
under g++ only.
You hit upon a defect in the language.
std::map<>::reverse_iterator is defined to be
std::reverse_iterator< std::map<>::iterator >
and std::map<>::const_reverse_iterator is defined to be
std::reverse_iterator< std::map<>::const_iterator >
The standard only requires that std::reverse_iterator supports comparison
for reverse_iterators with identical underlying iterator types. Thus, g++
is formally correct.
HOWEVER, this has been fixed in the draft for the next revision of the C++
standard. It also has been fixed in g++. Your code compiles fine with
g++-4.1.1.
Best
Kai-Uwe Bux