From: Moore, Paul (Paul.Moore_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-09-08 03:52:20
From: Valentin Bonnard [mailto:Bonnard.V_at_[hidden]]
> Moore, Paul wrote:
> > The SGI STL implementation includes a few non-standard
> > extensions (notably slist and hash_map). Would there be
> > any point in extracting those implementation (assuming
> > that is possible) and putting them into boost, so
> > that they are available for people not using the SGI STL?
> - different policies: SGI extentions are in namespace std, Boost
> libraries are in boost
Yes, although changing to have boost::slist and boost::hash_map is a
reasonable answer to that one.
> - you may just download the whole thing (SGI STL or STLport) and
> use it over your vendor's STL
Correct - but aren't there issues with how the SGI STL interacts with other
non-STL portions of vendor libraries (eg, iostreams)? I have no hard
evidence of this, but I recall seeing something to that effect.
> - we may just put a link the SGI STL page from the Boost page
That may be a good idea.
> - if you have the SGI STL installed, these files (povided by
> Boost) could conflict if what you suggest is done
Possibly, although I would hope that we could avoid that.
However, having looked at the SGI implementation, I don't think that the
slist and hash_map implementations could be extracted in a practical manner
(the inter-dependencies between files is too great). While I still think
that a non-SGI slist and hash_map implementation could be useful, I don't
think the advantage is worth the effort. Especially as that effort could
probably be better spent on implementing other things.
Thanks for the comments,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk