Thanks, won't have time to process all of this before meeting tonight but I
will have a go.


operator==, operator!= in the class synopsis
>
> I think the new preferred style is to put these as hidden friends
> inside the class. This presumably helps overload resolution
> performance. Also, operator!= can go, because the new operator
> rewrite rules will automatically obtain != from operator==.
>
>
I need to look up what hidden friends are!


>
> I think it should be "If the container is empty" (add definite article, for
> improved English happiness).
> Also, we can't have compile-time constraints ("MoveInsertable") apply
> depending
> on run-time conditions ("empty").
>

I should've re-written that. Clearly there's a few things I've missed.


> The "iterators have relational operators" specification needs to
> materialize in normative wording. Just saying that they "have" those
> operators is not enough; you also need to say what the semantics are.
>
>
> Jens
>