Maybe this question is a little bit theoretic, but I wonder what are the the design incentives behind defining std::minmax like this
template <class T>
pair<T,T> minmax (initializer_list<T> il);
Which means ,IMO, the passed object, li will be copied and each of its members must also be copy-constructible.
While, std::min_element (or for this matter std::max_element) is more "efficient" in the sense only the container iterators are being passed (no need to actually copy the entire container)
template <class ForwardIterator>
ForwardIterator min_element (ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last);
EDIT - based on Joachim Pileborg comment, initializer_list<T> objects are not being copied, so I'm pinpointing my question - why std::minmax is constrained to such objects and not to arbitrary containers (which have "non-const" nature, so to speak)
For your updated question:
minmaxcan also work with a general case of pair of iterators, it is calledminmax_element. Sominmaxitself is just a convenience shorthand to be able to write compact things like this:...instead of writing this: