Re: Recommended STL implementations for MSVC

From: William Kempf (sirwillard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-18 10:42:07

--- In boost_at_[hidden], "Ed Brey" <brey_at_a...> wrote:
> From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." <vawjr_at_r...>
> 
> >> [Which STL to use with VC?]
> > I'm using Dinkumware's update to the STL for VC.  I like it.  I'm 
not sure
> > I'be put it through it's paces, but ir speeded up my application 
just by
> > switching.
> 
> I haven't tried the latest Dinkumware code, largely because I was so
> dissapointed with the version that ships with VC6.  It is 
nonstandard, slow,
> bloated, unreadable, buggy, and not well supported.

At the time of it's release it was the most standard implementation 
that I'm aware of.  I've not found it to be slow or bloated either, 
though I'm sure it could be improved in these areas.  There's also 
very few bugs, all well documented with fixes and work arounds.  
Readability is in the eye of the beholder, though even the author 
complains about this one.  As for not well supported... have you 
tried to get support?  I've found the support to be exemplary.

> Items 1 and 6 are important to Boost.  With STLport, there is no 
problem,
> whereas we have to specifically put in workarounds in order to 
achieve
> compatibility with out-of-the-box VC6SP4.

What work arounds have been done in Boost?  The only ones I'm aware 
of come from compiler non-compliance, not problems with the "STL" (I 
really hate using that acronym).

Bill Kempf