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-----
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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk