From: JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-28 12:26:49
----- Mensaje original -----
De: Arkadiy Vertleyb <vertleyb_at_[hidden]>
Fecha: Domingo, Marzo 28, 2004 3:28 pm
Asunto: [boost] Re: Formal Review: Indexed Set
> Hi Joaquin,
> Sorry for joining this discussion so late, but here are my comments:
Hello Arkadiy, thanks for joining in. I was
certainly waiting for you to show up.
> - What is your evaluation of the design?
> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?
> The code looks clean. One minor question: the index class template's
> equal_range method forwards to lower/upper_bound. Is it really
> the best you
> can achieve here or is it just a temporary shortcut?
Well, there's some room for improvement. Pavel touched
on this issue some time ago, too. I didn't optimize the
code at the time cause (1) this is how other STL
implementations do it anyway and (2) the gain is not that
much. But consider this QoI detail in my todo list.
> - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
> Yes, definitely.
Definitely thank you :) I'm glad you like the library.
Maybe you have still some spare time to take a look at
the review notes and state your opinions on best namings
and header organization for indexed_set. Once fixed,
there's no way back and we'll have to live with whatever
cool/ugly names we have settled on.
Two more questions:
* Have you looked at mpl_index_list? This facility was
designed with RTL in mind so as to ease the internal
creation of indexed_set instantiations. Useful for your
* (off-topic) How's the RTL stuff going on? Planning
on open some public discussion on its design aspects?
I'd certainly love to contibute in that.
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk