Boost logo

Boost :

From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-21 23:56:42

"Gennadiy Rozental" wrote
> "Andy Little" wrote
>> "Andy Little" wrote
>>>Did you consider a generic tree design? If so
>>> why did you reject it in favour of this one?
>> Just to refresh... The above is the most interesting and yet unanswered
>> question
>> about property tree for me. Am I missing something? Is this a silly question?
>> Is
>> it too trivial to answer?
> IMO the same result (as library presents) could be achieved just by using
> multi_index.

There is a concept of a Path in Property Tree whereas multi_index has no path
concept but rather a unique key per
element and concerns itself with returning a particular view on a flat set of
data. OTOH the tree is a fixed hierarchical structure where the position of an
element in the structure is relevent (two elements can have the same name but
can be distinguished by their positions), whereas multi_index presents a subset
of a flat (non hierarchical) collection of elements. In the tree the particular
properties of the elements plays no part in their ordering, whereas in
multi_index their ordering in a particular view is a direct function of some
particular properties of the elements.

IOW there seems to me to be a great deal of difference between Tree and

Andy Little

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