When we are iterating in reverse direction, I see that most people use the following structure:

for (auto it = vec.rbegin(); it != vec.rend(); it  )
{
    // block of code //
}

But for a long time, I have a doubt about using this, and I want to know why the following code does not work.

As we know, the last element will have the highest index than any element index in the array, and the array is going to take contiguous memory.

My primary doubt is when iterating backwards, why shouldn't we use it--?

I want the reason why the following code is not going to work. I am running the loop from rbegin, that is the last element, and I am going until the first element. I am decrementing it by one in every iteration.

for (auto it = vec.rbegin(); it >= vec.begin(); it--)
{
    cout << *it << endl;
}

Even the below code is not working, why?

for(auto it = vec.rbegin(); it >= vec.begin(); it  )
{
    cout << *it << endl;
}

CodePudding user response：

First of all, in the given codes, the for loop's conditions are making issue due to type-mismatch.

The vec.rbegin() gives the std::vector::reverse_iterator, and the vec.begin() gives the std::vector::iterator; those are different types and can not be compared. Hence, you get compiler errors in those places.

---

When iterating backwards, why shouldn't we use it--?

See the following reference picture from

When you use rbegin(), you start from the last element. In order to advance further (like every iterator implementation) it uses the operator . Advance here means, iterating backwards direction, because the starting point is the last element. Therefore, you should be using it or it instead.

---

For the last for loop example, however, there is only a type-mismatch issue. Using ^✱std::reverse_iterator::base(), you could get/ convert the reverse iterator to the corresponding base iterator, and it can be compared with the vec.begin().

That means the following change will make it work:

for (auto it = vec.rbegin(); it.base() != vec.begin();   it)
//                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
{
   std::cout << *it << " ";
}

See a demo

---

Side Note:

• Even though, the above is possible, I would strongly suggest use the same iterators for comparison, which provides the code more natural look, and easy to understand for the fellow devs and less error-prone.
• ^✱Read more: Can I convert a reverse iterator to a forward iterator?

CodePudding user response：

Reverse iterators are designed to mimic forward iterators, so algorithms can be written in an agnostic way that works with both types. All iterators advance with operator , where forward iterators advance in a forward direction, and reverse iterators advance in a backwards direction.

CodePudding user response：

In all, it is just a design issue, the designer designed the begin, rbegin, end, rend in that way.

Take an example of a container with three elements {1,2,3}.

• begin() points to 1, end() points to the position after 3
• rbegin() points to 3, rend() points to the position before 1.

You can understand rbegin() as a special data struct of a special pointer (aka iterator) such that operator would be overloaded into -.

You can but not recommended to mix rbegin() with begin() cause they are different things. And mixing is always error-prone for most of the time.