const_reverse_iterator

[JohnW@Wessex]

I've been creating a custom container and ran into this problem that has had me flumoxed all day.
I'm sure I'm missing something obvious, but I just can't seem to see it.

The code below fails with:-
error C2440: 'return' : cannot convert from 'const int' to 'int &'

The platform is Visual Studio 2013.

The code compiles OK if 'it' is defined as an iterator, const_iterator or reverse_iterator, but not const_reverse_iterator.

#include <iterator>

template <typename T>
class Container
{
public:

  class iterator : public std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, T>
  {
  public:

    T& operator *()
    {
      return *p;
    }

    const T& operator *() const
    {
      return *p;
    }

    iterator& operator --()
    {
      return *this;
    }

    T* p;
  };

  class const_iterator : public std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, T>
  {
  public:

    const T& operator *() const
    {
      return *p;
    }

    const_iterator& operator --()
    {
      return *this;
    }

    T* p;
  };

  typedef std::reverse_iterator<iterator>       reverse_iterator;
  typedef std::reverse_iterator<const_iterator> const_reverse_iterator;
};

int main()
{
  Container<int>::const_reverse_iterator it;

  int i = *it;

  return 0;
}

[superbonzo]

the reference_type of std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, T> is T&, hence the error ( you're passing a const int to an int& in reverse_iterator:perator* ).

In order to solve the problem, you should explicitly set the appropriate reference and pointer type when deriving from std::iterator. Alternatively, you can use boost iterator facade/adaptor that will strip the constness of "const T" for you, or you can just derive from std::iterator<..., const T> at your own risk ( the resulting iterator will probably "work" most of the times, but it would not be strictly conforming ).

BTW, note that your code is still lacking interoperability between the const and non-const iterators ( conversions, comparisons ... ).

[JohnW@Wessex]

BTW, note that your code is still lacking interoperability between the const and non-const iterators ( conversions, comparisons ... ).

Indeed, but I was trying to post the least amount of code that replicated the problem.