From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-11 09:27:24
Just for additional motivation, part of the reason for a stable container
adaptor is to allow people to make associative containers based on sorted
vectors, whose elements have pointer, reference, and iterator stability just
like the standard associative containers do.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Schmitteckert (boost)" <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] challenge: stable_vector
> > The list will cost more storage. What advantage does storing the
> > in a list have?
> Simplicity, since you explicitly stated
> >>> motivation for this is that many people get burned by the instability
> Personally I prefer to do pointer acrobatics because I'm used to it, but
> you have to write code others have to be able to understand, list<> might
> be preferable. In case the overhead of a list<> is not acceptable, the
> additional space for a "generalized adaptor" might already hurt.
> Anyway, I agree that a stable_container_adaptor would be a nice thing to
> have. I was just curious of the "challenge".
> Best wishes,
> Info: http://www.boost.org Unsubscribe:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk