From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-20 16:26:47
"Pavel Vozenilek" <pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Marcin Kalicinski" wrote:
>>> 3. Even if you insist on alternative lookup. Why not just use single
>>> typedef with multi_index instead of all the implementation.
>> Could you elaborate more on that? I considered use of multi_index to
>> implement indexing for properties, but it only affected the
>> implementation part of library, not interface, and because I already had
>> a working, exception safe solution, I didn't see the reason to dump it
>> and add another dependency on another library.
> Multi-index has disadvantages:
> * high compilation time
> (people do change configuration structures very often)
This point couldn't affect the desing of the component so drstically. Let's
then reimplement any single component in STL, boost etc in with simpler but
less reach features.
> * doesn't compile on Borland
> * if it will be possible to provoke
> compile time error inside mu;ti-index
> by wrong use of ptree no one wil understand
> the result message
Is't it an issue with any modern library?
> IMO the fast lookup should be optional feature.
IMO it does not belong there at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk