Re: [boost] [Containers] String performance and compatibility

Subject: Re: [boost] [Containers] String performance and compatibility
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-05 05:39:36

El 05/08/2011 11:04, Mathias Gaunard escribió:

> Quick question about the SBO: why are you using two static_casts, with
> one to void* and another to the target type, rather than the more
> explicit reinterpret_cast?

Stylistic issue, no problem to change it to reinterpret_cast if that 
helps diagnostics.

> Unfortunately you cannot put long_t directly in the union (since pointer
> does not have to be a POD, I take it?), so I'm not sure the code can be
> made standard-conforming in C++03.

Not in theory, but all C++03 compilers treat this correctly. Anyway, 
maybe we could find a workaround to avoid defining the copy contructor 
(which is a limitation of the Boost.Move library, I think).

> Containers have a constructor that takes two iterators.
> It might be interesting to extend this by adding a constructor that
> takes a single range argument.

Yes, in ordered containers there are optimization opportunities in case 
the range is guaranteed to be already ordered (and/or unique) with the 
same comparison functor.

Best,

Ion