Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [tree] more questions (was: [tree] associative containers)
From: Cromwell Enage (sponage_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-03 14:05:21

From: Erik Erlandson > I'm not entirely sure about the relative merits of that versus defining > a parallel zoology of Hierarchical Containers that is basically > isomorphic to the traditional Container hierarchy, and leaving the > cursor definition more lightweight: perhaps just "iterator plus > parent(), begin() and end()", or alternatively not having a separate > cursor type, and simply having traditional iterators over children at > any given node. I'm curious as to what tree algorithms can take better advantage of the cursor interface as-is.  Also: * What are the primary differences between a plain hierarchy and a multiway hierarchy? * Why shouldn't one assume that an on-top cursor is dereferenceable? TIA, Cromwell D. Enage

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at