Re: [boost] [btree] Status report

Subject: Re: [boost] [btree] Status report
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-19 14:14:13

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 5:40 AM, Thorsten Ottosen
<thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Den 18-05-2011 20:54, Beman Dawes skrev:
>>
>> The slides for my BoostCon "Proposed Boost B-tree Library"
>> presentation are available:
>>
>>
>> http://github.com/boostcon/2011_presentations/raw/master/tue/proposed_b_tree_library.pdf
>
> // boost::btree::
> template <class Key, class T,
> class Traits = default_endian_traits,
> class Compare = btree::less<Key> >
> class btree_map;
>
> Would it makes sense to swap the Traits and Compare argument?

I've gone back and forth on that. The argument that may sway me is
trying to stay as close as possible to standard library containers.

> Isn't it more
> common to change the predicate?

I'm not sure. Some folks want the highest possible performance, don't
care about portability, and are willing to accept alignment
limitations. Many others want some combination of those. That implies
a lot of use of the Traits parameter.

But the current ordering does seem to be a bit of a lightning rod!

Thanks,

--Beman