Re: [boost] discrete_set class

From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-27 18:52:48

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "spamjunk" <spamjunk_at_[hidden]>

> Yes, but as I said, sooner or later they would have to interact with dynamic
> sets and have to be converted to actual sets.

Perhaps. But not in my case. And, if I really want to
interact with dynamic sets, I'll use a bitset or other
forms of dynamic sets instead.

--Joel

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joel de Guzman" <djowel_at_[hidden]>
> To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 7:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [boost] discrete_set class
> 
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "spamjunk" <spamjunk_at_[hidden]>
> >
> >
> > > They aren't always known at compile-time.  You can create sets
> dynamically
> > > at run-time, using the constructor.  What SetOf allows you to do is, if
> all
> > > the elements are compile-time constants, create the entire set as a
> > > compile-time constant.  You could use the same argument for SetOf, but
> it
> > > would still have to be "converted" to an actual set of bits before
> > > interacting with other sets, so you wouldn't actually be saving
> anything.
> >
> > No, on the contrary, you can use expression templates to make static
> > sets interact with each other. I have an implementation that can
> > conceptually hold 256 elements, can do all the set operations (i.e
> > negation, union, intersection, difference and xor). I was hoping your
> > set would be like this.
> >
> > --Joel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>