|
Boost : |
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-19 08:05:03
"Matt Calabrese" <rivorus_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On 5/18/06, Howard Hinnant <hinnant_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Actually you don't even need a new type compressed_tuple. You could
> put this functionality straight into tuple. It'd be a royal pain to
> do for tuple sizes greater than 3 or 4 though. Dave, how many empty
> members do you find yourself glomming together? I often have several
> potentially empty members but usually have at least that many non-
> empty members to spread them around on (I have one example where
> wanted to glom two empty members onto a non-empty member).
>
> True, though one [potential] problem with that would be that compressed
> pairs and tuples are allowed to share storage for empty types,
I don't think so. See line 258 of
http://www.boost-consulting.com/boost/boost/detail/compressed_pair.hpp
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk