Re: [boost] Interest in StaticVector - fixed capacity vector

Subject: Re: [boost] Interest in StaticVector - fixed capacity vector
From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-15 11:00:17

Dave Abrahams wrote:
> If we can figure out how to get cars to bounce harmlessly out of
> collisions we could decide to make it legal to ignore stop signs and
> just count on the bounce to handle it.  Should we?

Cars are cars, and static_vector::push_back is, well, 
static_vector::push_back. They have nothing in common. You can't 
mechanically apply the same rule to both. push_back throwing doesn't imply 
operator[] throwing, for example. Their uses are different. A throwing 
static_vector::push_back enables existing algorithms that use push_back or 
back_inserter to continue to work without their behavior becoming undefined. 
A throwing static_vector::operator[]... does not enable anything. :-)