From: Andrey Semashev (andysem_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-14 11:55:05
Marcin Kalicinski wrote:
> The allocations problem remains. I have been unable to come up with a scheme
> that would reduce the number of allocations without compromising simplicty
> of the library. The key point is that I want to maintain validity of
> iterators in presence of insertions/erases. This rules out array based
> containers. The best I can think of is a custom list implementation. That
> has potential to reduce number of allocations by roughly 30%, which is not
> enough IMO.
Just a thought... Maybe a deque with gaps would suffice these
requirements? I'm not familiar with the library but I had a similar task
once and such approach did well enough.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk