iterator question.

[Mark Shephard]

Sounds like the iGeom iterator needs to be changed.

Carl Ollivier-Gooch wrote:
> Jason Kraftcheck wrote:
>> Mark Shephard wrote:
>>> The Simmetrix people have been looking at the ITAPS iMesh, iMeshP, iRel
>>> and iGeom interfaces.
>>>
>>> One of the questions they have sent us has to do with iterators and is:
>>>
>>> "Are iMesh_getNextEntIter and iGeom_getNextEntIter supposed to have the
>>> same behavior as their documentation describes two different behaviors -
>>> iMesh_getNextEntIter indicates whether the current call returned data
>>> (which is fairly standard behavior for an iterator),iGeom_getNextEntIter
>>> indicates whether the next call will return data (which is kind of odd
>>> behavior for an iterator)."
>>>
>>> I would think they should have the same behavior and the iMesh behavior
>>> is the right one. Comments please.
>>>
>>
>> I think (if I correctly recall the that group discussion about this) that
>> the iMesh one is the correct one.  Returning information about next 
>> call, as
>> the iGeom one does, is not usable in mesh modification scenarios 
>> (consider
>> iterator at second to last entity when last entity is deleted.)
> 
> Jason has identified precisely the reason that the iMesh iterator 
> behavior was changed.
> 
> Carl
> 
>