From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-08 07:57:12
From: "John Maddock" <John_Maddock_at_[hidden]>
> >If there is no implementation problem in the current code, I will
> >start to rewrite fixed_capacity_deque too.
> Am I missing something or is a fixed capacity deque some kind of oxymoron?
> The issue is that the only difference between a vector and a deque is in
> the way that memory management is conducted, so if there isn't any memory
> management then what's the point? A fixed cyclic buffer however would be
> good idea. Or have I got this backwards?
Well, a fixed cyclic buffer is a fixed deque, as I understand it. A vector
has push/pop_back, a deque has push/pop_back/front.
A fixed deque with 2^n capacity is almost never worse than a fixed vector.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk