Boost logo

Boost :

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-08 14:52:50

On Friday, March 8, 2002, at 01:33 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:

> From: "Howard Hinnant" <hinnant_at_[hidden]>
>> On Friday, March 8, 2002, at 12:51 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:
>>> One way to solve it (that I see) is
>>> template<class F> vector::vector(size_type n, F f);
>>> that will allocate memory and use f(this->_Ptr, n) to initialize it.
>> I believe you can essentially do the same thing with the existing
>> iterator interface.
>> template <class InputIterator>
>> vector(InputIterator first, InputIterator last,
>> const Allocator& = Allocator());
>> Does your proposal have advantages over this?
> Why would anyone want an uninitialized vector? One legitimate reason is
> that
> you have an existing C-style library function 'f' that will initialize
> it.
> I don't see how the iterator interface can be used to achieve the same
> effect. If the current vector interface is enough, why all this talk
> about
> uninitialized values?

I'd say that's a definite advantage, thanks.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at