From: Kevlin Henney (Kevlin.Henney_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-01-15 04:16:38
Andy Sawyer skulduggered:
>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...
The best kind!
That said, I can't see that it is anything but a true and accurate
observation, albeit a little subtle and devious. So perhaps constant time
plus a footnote to clarify?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk