Subject: Re: [boost] [move][container] Review Request (new versions of Boost.Move and Boost.Container in sandbox and vault)
From: Jeffrey Hellrung (jhellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-24 12:56:04
Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
> Gottlob Frege escribió:
>> Any thoughts (from anyone?) on my comments about making flat_map's
>> stable? Then it would be a complete replacement to std::map.
> Making flat_xxx a template adaptor (like stack or similar) and using
> stable_vector as the underlying type would make flat_stable_vector a
> replacement for std::map.
I would prefer it as is, but I haven't had a need for iterator
stability. I thought the point of a flat_map/flat_set was to be an
as-lightweight-as-possible generic associative container, but still with
reasonable (O(log n)) lookup time.
Perhaps a policy-based approach is possible, or an entirely separate
class, e.g., stable_flat_xxx?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk