RE: [boost] Re: circular_buffer?

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-02-28 09:45:20

Moore, Paul wrote on 2/28/01 5:24 AM
>I have to admit that I still don't see the point of the resizing versions -
>if you want something that allows you to add entries indefinitely, why not
>use one of the existing library classes (say, deque)? As far as I can see,
>the ONLY POINT to circularity is the overwriting property (for all sorts of
>MRU-type lists).

The resizing circular buffer can have an overhead of between 25% to 50% 
of deque.  The code size and complexity is similarly reduced (faster and 
smaller).  In many ways, the resizing circular buffer is a better deque 
than deque, though it does lack the guarantee of stable pointers and 
references during push_back/push_front.

But it appears to not be of widespread enough interest to justify 
submission into boost.

-Howard