From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-05 17:55:34
On Tuesday, February 5, 2002, at 09:29 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On a larger scale, I believe this is not the right way to go, so I would
> actually oppose fixed_*. Proliferating all of STL's containers in each
> design direction (in this case, fixed capacity) is simply a losing
> We'd end up where the smart pointers are - lots of them, but still quite
> often you'd have to write your own from scratch.
I understand your concerns but we have a number of applications where
a fixed_capacity_vector or stack are essential for good performance.
Do you have a better suggestion how containers with the fixed_capacity
property and no dynamic allocation could be implemented in a better way?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk