Boost logo

Boost :

From: christopher diggins (cdiggins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-01 12:07:25

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:13 PM
Subject: [boost] Re: Boost Array Initialization Technique

> christopher diggins <cdiggins_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Neal Becker" <ndbecker2_at_[hidden]>
>>> I strongly disagree. Forcing initialization makes code that is not
>>> useful
>>> for high performance numerical processing. When we declare a container
>>> of
>>> 1000000 elements, we don't want to waste time initializing each, unless
>>> we
>>> want to.
>> I think the best solution in this case is to use an alternative
>> "collection"
>> for numerical processing. Using a class intended as general purpose array
>> for numerical processing I think would not be a good idea.
> ...because...?

I stated that far too strongly, sorry. My reasoning is that the
implementation and interface of a numerical array could be optimized versus
a general array. I would not design numerical arrays and general purpose
arrays in the same way. For instance I would design a general purpose array
to be default initialized, while I would permit a numerical array to be
non-initialized. However, this is all moot because it is now perfectly clear
to me that Boost.Array has the mandate to be as much like a built-in array
as possible. Even if I do not particularly like that decision choice it is
of course an acceptable choice to make. Making it a pseudo-container on the
other hand is in my opinion a very big mistake.

Christopher Diggins

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at