From: Andy Sawyer (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-01-14 17:37:15
On 12 January 2000 15:14, jsiek_at_[hidden] wrote:
> Subject: [boost] Collection Concept
> Dave Abrahams writes:
> > Jeremy,
> > It looks quite good to me. One problem: it's going to be hard
> > to satisfy the "amortized constant time swap" requirement for
> > the array<> implementation we're thinking of, I think :(
> Thanks for pointing that out. I'll change it to linear time.
Someone might argue that array<T,N> actually _does_ satisfy constant time
swap, since the numer of operations required is the same for all instances
of array<T,N> (bearing in mind that array<T,N+1> is a different type to
array<T,N>). This would, of course, be skulduggery of the highest order...
-- Andy Sawyer, Technical Director, Sufficiently Advanced Technology Ltd. mailto:andys_at_[hidden] ICQ:14417938 http://www.morebhp.com Mobile: (+44)7970 299892 [Voice/SMS] (+44)7970 523053 [Fax] "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk