From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-27 10:40:32
Oh no - what you have is just perfect - assuming that resize creates new
entries and doesn't just increase some internal indicator. A copy would
create the problem of loading to a temporary object that is then copied from
which would invalidate its address.
Neal Becker wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:
>> I wonder about this - but I know nothing of ublas. If v.resize
>> actually creates the entries I guess it would be just fine. Now I
>> wonder about my own implementation of serialization for std::vector.
>> It seems yours here is more efficient.
> I wondered whether I should use std::copy instead - maybe this would
> provide more opportunity for optimization?
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk