Subject: Re: [boost] Interest in StaticVector - fixed capacity vector
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-12 07:39:06
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Stewart, Robert
>> I'd really like to see the interface be as close to C++11
>> std::vector as possible (other than vector<bool>).
> Interface is one thing. That doesn't address the idea of throwing exceptions when exceeding capacity. Many wanting to use static_vector in embedded environments don't want exceptions. The rest of us find them useful. Still, BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION provides a means to configure that, but it affects all Boost code; localizing the effect may be desirable. Matt called for a differently named container as a means to provide the no-exception behavior. I think a policy class, defaulted to the throwing behavior, is the better approach, despite Jeff's thinking it an unnecessary complication.
Is it a logic error or a runtime error? IMO exceeding the capacity
here is a logic error and should be handled with an assert by default.
Isn't it comparable to doing a pop_back() on an empty vector?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk