Date: 2002-08-28 15:07:20
And what exactly makes it non-discrete?
> > >If all the elements of the set are known at compile time, why
> > >do you need to store the bits at all? Your class can encode
> > >the information in its type, thus, your class can consume
> > >zero bytes.
> > right up until you need to add (or subtract) something that isn't knows
> > until runtime.
> ....which doesn't always happen. There are certainly things I could use it
> for at compile-time, rather than my existing practice of generating a
> header file containing an array of magic numbers with an external program.
> Back to naming: this new proposed set is no more discrete than the STL's
> set, so "discrete_set" is a misnomer. I think that the best name I've
> heard so far here for it (other than "set", which is taken :-) is
> "powerset". Was there something wrong with that suggestion?
> Also (albeit without having put much thought into it) it seems to me that
> there ought to be a lot of overlap with bitset/dyn_bitset/etc. Can all of
> these be rolled into one somehow?
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk