Strange message from codeblocks IDE about constness of iterator

[Paul]

I wrote
std::vector<int> vect = {-1, 0, 1, 2, 3, -4, 4};

std::sort(vect.begin(), vect.end());


Using codeblocks, I put my cursor in the word begin and it reads const_iterator std::vector::begin()

Surely, this is wrong? vect.begin() is a non-const iterator, isn't it? Or am I missing something? Or is codeblocks just generally unreliable?

Thank you very much for your feedback.

Paul

[Victor Bazarov]

On 6/15/2015 9:28 AM, Paul wrote:
> I wrote
> std::vector<int> vect = {-1, 0, 1, 2, 3, -4, 4};
>
> std::sort(vect.begin(), vect.end());
>
>
> Using codeblocks, I put my cursor in the word begin and it reads
> const_iterator std::vector::begin()
>
> Surely, this is wrong? vect.begin() is a non-const iterator, isn't
> it? Or am I missing something? Or is codeblocks just generally
> unreliable?

There are two versions of 'vector::begin' member function. Perhaps
codeblocks doesn't know which one to show and picks the apparently wrong
one...

V
--
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Paul]

On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 2:34:17 PM UTC+1, Victor Bazarov wrote:
> On 6/15/2015 9:28 AM, Paul wrote:
> > I wrote
> > std::vector<int> vect = {-1, 0, 1, 2, 3, -4, 4};
> >
> > std::sort(vect.begin(), vect.end());
> >
> >
> > Using codeblocks, I put my cursor in the word begin and it reads
> > const_iterator std::vector::begin()
> >
> > Surely, this is wrong? vect.begin() is a non-const iterator, isn't
> > it? Or am I missing something? Or is codeblocks just generally
> > unreliable?
>
> There are two versions of 'vector::begin' member function. Perhaps
> codeblocks doesn't know which one to show and picks the apparently wrong
> one...

Yes, if vect is a const vector, then vect.begin() is a const_iterator.

Thanks,

Paul