_Uglify the current member of move_iterator

[miscco]

Looking at counted_iterator I found that move_iterator has a non-ugly member current. The same for reverse_iterator

As this is a purely private member it is not user accessible and should be _Ugly

[StephanTLavavej]

For final review, we should think about the bincompat consequences. (I think they're acceptable, as mentioned above.)

[CaseyCarter]

For final review, we should think about the bincompat consequences. (I think they're acceptable, as mentioned above.)

I don't recall CLR metadata knowing about access control at all, or caring about the names of members: it's primarily concerned with the sizes of non-static data members and their offsets within the complete object's layout. (We even had success with the <atomic> changes moving the first data member into a base class.) Altogether, I'm not concerned about bincompat here since we still have an object of type iterator_type in the same location.

[CaseyCarter]

Thank you for making our code, and our lives, a little _Uglier.