Re: Proposal: Sorted Vector Container

From: corwinjoy (cjoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-08 17:54:00

--- In boost_at_y..., Carl Daniel <cpdaniel_at_p...> wrote:
> From: "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...>
> > From: "corwinjoy" <cjoy_at_h...>
> >
> > > I think it would be nice to try to come to some agreement on a 
family
> > > of solutions for this.
> >>
> > > 1. After the container is first sorted, is it the container's 
job or
> > > the user's job to sort it if elements are later added or 
removed?
> >
> > I want to at least have an interface available which lets me 
say, "I know
> > what I'm doing; put this /here/, and don't waste any time
> > verifying/re-sorting".
> 
> Agreed.  In my implementation, I provided the normal std::map/set 
insert operations, which maintained sorted order.  A
> client could do un-sorted inserts by directly accessing the 
underlying sequence (vector) and (if necessary) re-sorting
> to restore the invariant.
> 

I like the idea of having an additional interface to provide an 
unverified sort.  IMO, the the normal std::map insert type interface 
should, however, be checked/sorted to make the container more 
compatible as a substitute for std::map.