Subject: Re: [boost] [utility] new auto_buffer class --- RFC
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-06 08:26:15
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
On Thursday, March 05, 2009 6:30 PM
> I do not want to supply the whole interface of vector. For the
> operations that they have in common, it is almost a drop-in
> I say almost, because this class is really about speed, and
> often don't
> allow overlapping ranges, assignment to *this etc. The
> guarantees might also be weaker if it hurts performance.
If your goal is speed at the expense of all else, then name the class "fast_buffer" or something of that sort. It should be clear that there are many interested in a vector replacement that includes the small buffer optimization. If you're not interested in creating the latter, perhaps another will.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk