Why no emplacement iterators in C++11 or C++14?

Is there any technical reason we couldn’t have front_emplacer, back_emplacer, and emplacer?

No, there is no technical reason. As proof, here is a complete implementation of back_emplacer with a demo of your Use Case 1…

#include <iterator>
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>

template<class Container>
class back_emplace_iterator : public std::iterator< std::output_iterator_tag,
                                                   void, void, void, void >
    Container* container;
    typedef Container container_type;

    explicit back_emplace_iterator(Container& x) : container(&x) {}

    template<class T>
    operator=(T&& t)
        return *this;

    back_emplace_iterator& operator*() { return *this; }
    back_emplace_iterator& operator++() { return *this; }
    back_emplace_iterator& operator++(int) { return *this; }

template< class Container >
inline back_emplace_iterator<Container>
back_emplacer( Container& c )
    return back_emplace_iterator<Container>(c);

struct Demo
    int i;
    Demo(int i) : i(i) {}

int main()
    std::vector<int> x = {1,2,3,4,5};

    std::vector<Demo> y;

    std::copy(x.begin(), x.end(), back_emplacer(y));

    for (auto d : y)
        std::cout << d.i << std::endl;

Possible Known Issue: Does the universal reference of operator= hide an implicitly generated copy/move operator=? If so these need to be explicitly defined in a way that beats the universal reference in overload resolution.

Leave a Comment