This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of NAD status.

### 903. `back_insert_iterator` issue

Section: 23.5.2.2 [back.insert.iterator] Status: NAD Submitter: Dave Abrahams Opened: 2008-09-19 Last modified: 2016-01-28

Priority: Not Prioritized

View all other issues in [back.insert.iterator].

View all issues with NAD status.

Discussion:

I just noticed this; don't know how far the problem(?) extends or whether it's new or existing: `back_insert_iterator`'s `operator*` is not `const`, so you can't dereference a `const` one.

[ Post Summit Daniel adds: ]

> If done, this change should be applied for `front_insert_iterator`, `insert_iterator`, `ostream_iterator`, and `ostreambuf_iterator` as well.

[ Batavia (2009-05): ]

> Alisdair notes that these all are output iterators. Howard points out that `++*i` would no longer work if we made this change.

> Move to NAD.

[ 2009-05-25 Daniel adds: ]

1. If 1009 is accepted, `OutputIterator` does no longer support post increment.
2. To support backward compatibility a second overload of `operator*` can be added. Note that the `HasDereference` concept (and the `HasDereference` part of concept `Iterator`) was specifically refactored to cope with optional const qualification and to properly reflect the dual nature of built-in `operator*` as of 12.6 [over.literal]/6.

Proposed resolution: