From: Rich Sposato (rds_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-03 18:32:18
Gary Powell wrote:
> I'm interested. I ran into the same issues with std::set that you have
> and because of it, switched to a map when it wasn't really necessary.
> Regarding acceptance by boost... I'm interested and will take a look
> at the code.
The code works with the STL version for GCC, but does not play well
with other implementations of the STL. Later, I would like Boost to
adopt these classes, but right now, I am only asking if Boost members
are interested in the abilities these containers afford.
Some questions I want Boost to ask are:
1. Do you like the class names: flex_set, flex_map, flex_multiset, and
2. How can I implement the classes to not just compile and run with
multiple compilers, but also work with existing STL implementations?
(I am in the midst of making a separate version of these containers
to work with Microsoft's STL implementation. I much prefer making
only one version of these.)
3. Do you think I overlooked anything when I implemented these?
(One suggestion is writing the containers to use an equivalence
function in the comparator.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk