Re: [boost] [unordered] Buffered functions?

Subject: Re: [boost] [unordered] Buffered functions?
From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-24 11:05:09

David Abrahams skrev:
> Hi all, 
> 
> Can someone please explain why the unordered containers store two copies
> of the hash and equality functions, and why they aren't using
> compressed_pair to take advantage of the EBO for these?

Its been discussed before, and here are the answers I got from the author:

1. storing two functors had to do with implementing exception safety if 
copying of the functors may throw. Was it swap() that was the problem?

2. the space optimization only gave little less space.

-Thorsten