Re: [boost] Re: Review Request: cyclic_buffer

From: Jan Gaspar (jga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-09 04:40:22

Hi Nigel,

Nigel Stewart wrote:

>
>         So the issue here seems to be whether a cyclic_buffer
>         should be circular-list-like or FIFO-like.  Given
>         that there is already a queue container adapter,
>         perhaps it's worth listing some applications
>         of cyclic_buffer that depend on either
>         circular-list-like or FIFO-like semantics.

I designed the cyclic_buffer mainly for adding the elements at the end of the
container and automatic removal of elements from the beginning - it is just plain
FIFO, nothing else. I don't want to add elements at the beginning. I think it will
be less confusing - just keep it rather simple.

>
>
>         Could a queue adaptor using a cyclic_buffer instead
>         of a deque provide the explicitly FIFO-like mode of
>         operation?  (While leaving cyclic_buffer to be
>         circular-list-like?)

Queue cannot use the cyclic_buffer because the queue's size is not restricted.
Probably I don't understand this question.

>
>
> >>      Semantics of resize should probably follow vector:
> >>      1. The capacity is implicitly adjusted to fit the
> >>         requested size.
>
>         http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/Vector.html
>
>         vector::resize
>
>         Inserts or erases elements at the end such that
>         the size becomes n.
>
>         (I think a developer may find it surprising for a
>          cyclic_buffer::resize to be clamped to the capacity.)
>

OK, you're right.