On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 13:37, Roman Babinicz via Std-Proposals
<std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>
> Could we add operators at() to span<> container?
>
> value_type & at(size_type n);
> const value_type & at(size_type n) const;
>
> they would have same behaviour as in vector, array - that is throws an
> exception if n is outside of size of the container.
>
> 1) can we have that?
>
> 2) if yes, then should I write a proposal paper or how else to help in this?
> Can it make it to C++20?
>
> Imo it is a notable defect that span can not be a drop in replacement
> for code taking a (reference to) array/vector that is using at().
>
> 3)
> By the way, in case of span that has specific size (not dynamic_extent)
> we could perhaps have a static assert and the function might be constexpr.

I predict this to be an uphill battle. Some audiences think that at()
should have never been
in vector, and adding it to array was a mistake, and that that mistake
shouldn't propagate
any further. I would guess that some such audiences are co-authors of span.

Personally, I think they're wrong, but I'm just giving you a heads-up
that this is not going to be
a trivial sale.