Yes, this is indeed possible in C++ and is, in fact, used extensively in the C++ standard library (aka STL). For a prime example, look no further than std::string or the various pluggable memory allocators. The example given in the article appears to these eyes as one of a C programmer trying to make C++ do things like C and failing. To be more precise, if one is accessing people objects by iterator, why would a raw pointer to a person need to be manipulated in this way? In addition, what happens if the object must be accessed in multiple ways, e.g., exists in both a normal list and a sorted list (or multiple sorted lists). The C method falls down as there is no single pair of *next and *prev but rather multiple.
Don't get me wrong, C definitely has its uses. Its relative simplicity for one. However, C++'s generic algorithms and data structures should not be discarded so lightly.
Follow
Yes, this is indeed possible in C++ and is, in fact, used extensively in the C++ standard library (aka STL). For a prime example, look no further than std::string or the various pluggable memory allocators. The example given in the article appears to these eyes as one of a C programmer trying to make C++ do things like C and failing. To be more precise, if one is accessing people objects by iterator, why would a raw pointer to a person need to be manipulated in this way? In addition, what happens if the object must be accessed in multiple ways, e.g., exists in both a normal list and a sorted list (or multiple sorted lists). The C method falls down as there is no single pair of *next and *prev but rather multiple.
Don't get me wrong, C definitely has its uses. Its relative simplicity for one. However, C++'s generic algorithms and data structures should not be discarded so lightly.
--Miles Elam 20:26, 4 September 2012 (CEST)