According to the C++ specification (23.2.4.3), vector::erase() only invalidates "all the iterators and references after the point of the erase"
As such, when using reverse_iterators to pass over all vector members, an erase on the current iterator should not cause the rend() member to be invalidated.
This code will run under G++ but will provide a runtime exception on Windows (VS2010):
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
    vector<int> x;
    x.push_back(1);
    x.push_back(2);
    x.push_back(3);
    //Print
    for(vector<int>::const_iterator i = x.begin(); i != x.end(); ++i)
        printf("%d\n", *i);
    //Delete second node
    for(vector<int>::reverse_iterator r = x.rbegin(); r != x.rend(); ++r)
        if(*r == 2)
            x.erase((r+1).base());
    //Print
    for(vector<int>::const_iterator i = x.begin(); i != x.end(); ++i)
        printf("%d\n", *i);
    return 0;
}
The error is interesting:
Expression: vector iterator not decrementable
Given on the line of the second for loop upon the second run. The decrement refers to the internal "current" iterator member of the reverse_iterator, which is decremented whenever reverse_iterator is incremented.
Can anyone explain this behavior, please?
Thanks.
EDIT
I think this code sample better shows that it's not a problem with r, but rather with rend():
//Delete second node
for(vector<int>::reverse_iterator r = x.rbegin(); r != x.rend();)
{
    vector<int>::reverse_iterator temp = r++;
    if(*temp == 2)
        x.erase((temp+1).base());
}
And errors out with vector iterators incompatible on the for loop upon entry after erase.
Your program invokes Undefined Behavior. Therefore, neither compiler is incorrect.
According to the Standard, std::vector<int>::reverse_iterator is a typedef for std::reverse_iterator<std::vector<int>::iterator>.  The implementation of std::reverse_iterator<Iter> is specified to have a protected member Iter current;, and all other members and functions of reverse_iterator are specified based on the behavior of the member current.
So suppose we have r == reverse_iterator(i), where i is a valid iterator into std::vector<int> x;.  Each of these is then guaranteed by the Standard.
r.current == i
(r+1).current == (i-1)
(r+1).base() == (i-1)
On calling x.erase((r+1).base());, all iterators after i-1 are invalidated.  Of course, this includes i, and therefore also r.current.
The next thing your program attempts to evaluate is ++r.  This expression is specified as having an effect --r.current;.  But since r.current was invalidated, this expression is Undefined Behavior; and so is ++r.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With