Subject: Re: [boost] Stack-based vector container
From: Domagoj Saric (dsaritz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-25 18:14:53
"Emil Dotchevski" <emildotchevski_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Thorsten Ottosen <nesotto_at_[hidden]>
>> As for the conjectured extra indirection, then I'm not sure it can become
>> any major performance problem, nor do I see how one can avoid it when we
>> need to go for the heap in certain cases.
> Clearly the extra indirection is the only potential problem, otherwise
> a stack-based vector implementation could probably be replaced by a
> stack-based std::vector allocator.
I don't see that 'clearly'...the most pronounced effect/issue is highly
dependent on the use case and the software and hardware environment...
-- "What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate." Neil Postman
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk