From Jason Turner

[iterator.concept.winc]

Diff to HTML by rtfpessoa

tmp/tmpt99csm9u/{from.md → to.md} RENAMED
@@ -125,19 +125,19 @@ a signed-integer-like type.
125
  type. `is-signed-integer-like<I>` is `true` if and only if `I` is a
126
  signed-integer-like type.
127
 
128
  Let `i` be an object of type `I`. When `i` is in the domain of both pre-
129
  and post-increment, `i` is said to be *incrementable*. `I` models
130
- `weakly_incrementable<I>` only if
131
 
132
  - The expressions `++i` and `i++` have the same domain.
133
  - If `i` is incrementable, then both `++i` and `i++` advance `i` to the
134
  next element.
135
  - If `i` is incrementable, then `addressof(++i)` is equal to
136
  `addressof(i)`.
137
 
138
- *Recommended practice:* The implementaton of an algorithm on a weakly
139
  incrementable type should never attempt to pass through the same
140
  incrementable value twice; such an algorithm should be a single-pass
141
  algorithm.
142
 
143
  [*Note 3*: For `weakly_incrementable` types, `a` equals `b` does not
 
125
  type. `is-signed-integer-like<I>` is `true` if and only if `I` is a
126
  signed-integer-like type.
127
 
128
  Let `i` be an object of type `I`. When `i` is in the domain of both pre-
129
  and post-increment, `i` is said to be *incrementable*. `I` models
130
+ `weakly_incrementable<I>` only if:
131
 
132
  - The expressions `++i` and `i++` have the same domain.
133
  - If `i` is incrementable, then both `++i` and `i++` advance `i` to the
134
  next element.
135
  - If `i` is incrementable, then `addressof(++i)` is equal to
136
  `addressof(i)`.
137
 
138
+ *Recommended practice:* The implementation of an algorithm on a weakly
139
  incrementable type should never attempt to pass through the same
140
  incrementable value twice; such an algorithm should be a single-pass
141
  algorithm.
142
 
143
  [*Note 3*: For `weakly_incrementable` types, `a` equals `b` does not