Re: [boost] [utility] new auto_buffer class --- RFC

Subject: Re: [boost] [utility] new auto_buffer class --- RFC
From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-06 09:30:26

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 06 March 2009, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> Scott McMurray skrev:
> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 18:29, Thorsten Ottosen
> >
> > <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> I do not want to supply the whole interface of vector.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> It's a lot of work, so if rather have a reason to do this. And in
> general it is not a drop-in replacement for vector, so there is no
> reason to pretend it is.

What about the more general container concepts, for the sake of generic 
programming?  Is it a Container/Forward Container/Sequence/Back Insertion 
Sequence?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxM4MACgkQ5vihyNWuA4UQJgCdHN/s4DE4DHJaBHRiWksysK6x
RysAoLQMaitkC8rjaXinwX9H+VOvcfF7
=/Dq0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----