Subject: Re: [boost] [interprocess][circular_buffer] specialized containers should have container template argument
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-04 12:22:45
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> However, we can make them faster if you allow a new template argument.
> For example
> typename T,
> typename Pred,
> typename Alloc
> class PushBackContainer = /* some default */
> class flat_set;
> My motivation is that these can perform somewhat better e.g. with an
> array (for circular_buffer), or auto_buffer (for flat_set/flat_map).
> I think even some very simply array wrapper would be useable with
Interesting, but it seems that PushBackContainer and Allocator overlap.
auto_buffer is basically an allocator. But flat_xxx could be implemented
in any sequence container with random-access iterators (we need them for
binary search), so maybe it could be interesting to have more generic
classes like map_sequence<>, set_sequence (names are horrible I know,
but it's just an example):
or something more similar to std::queue:
template<class T, class Sequence>
Anyway, my opinion is that we should only use a minimal interface for
Sequence ((r/c)begin,(r/c)end, insert, erase, clear()).
Another option would be something like:
template< class T
, class Allocator
, class Sequence = vector<T, A>
and we should require (as we require for allocator::value_type) that
Sequence::value_type is T and Sequence::allocator_type is Allocator.
> The EA STL implementation has this features.
I will look at this. Is there any public
> What do you think?
These days I don't have much time and I have other improvements with
higher priority but I will add to the to-do list.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk