Boost logo

Boost :

From: Boris (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-04 13:07:26

"Martin Bonner" <martin.bonner_at_[hidden]>,
> ----Original Message----
> From: Boris [mailto:boris_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: 04 October 2005 13:18
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] boost::dynamic_array
>> The reason why I don't want to use std::vector in the project I work
>> on is that I need a two-dimensional array. Two-dimensional means that
>> the array stores not only the length but also width and height.
>> Additionally its elements can be accessed with operator()(size_t
>> column, size_t row). Now I could derive my two-dimensional array from
>> std::vector but that doesn't make much sense because how should the
>> dimensions change when someone calls push_back()? A fixed-size array
>> whose size can be set a runtime would be an ideal candidate to derive
>> my two-dimensional array from. For all arrays with more than one
>> dimension std::vector isn't probably an ideal parent class.
> So don't /derive/ from std::vector, /contain/ a std::vector instead (and
> forward the appropriate calls to it).
> It's really not very difficult (particularly as you don't need to both
> with
> eg any of the 'insert' overloads).

It's not very difficult but not what I expect to be good practice of code
reuse. Why do the extra effort and forward all calls if you could simply

Anyway I developed my fixed-size array meanwhile. Boost doesn't seem to be
much interested which is perfectly okay of course. If anyone else is
interested however or needs a runtime version of a fixed-size array just ask


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