From: Tom Brinkman (reportbase_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-16 11:26:45
I use STL now like its second nature. As the Intrusive library proposes to
be an alternative to STL for some situations, I am intrigued. I have no
background with intrusive containers so I'm not shur why I would use one. I
scanned the documentation, and still do not feel like I would know when to
use Intrusive and when to use STL. Learning STL is a huge commitement of
time and energy, so I think that people might be reluctant to give Intrusive
a look without a strong and clear reason why.
Here is the introduction from the documentation:
*"Boost.Intrusive* is a library presenting some intrusive containers to the
world of C++. While intrusive containers were and are widely used in C, they
became more and more forgotten in C++ due to the presence of the standard
containers, which don't support intrusive techniques. *Boost.Intrusive* not
only reintroduces this technique to C++, but also encapsulates the
implementation in STL-like interfaces. Hence anyone familiar with standard
containers can easily use *Boost.Intrusive*. Like their STL-counterparts,
intrusive containers use template parameters to control the stored data
types and some special aspects of intrusive containers."
This is not adequate for a motivating introductory discussion about why and
where I should use boost::intrusive. Give a couple of hello-world
motivating examples of where STL falls short and why boost::intrusive is
better. Get the reader excited about why boost::intrusive is "cool".
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk