Re: [boost] [flat_map] Any interest in a flat_map variant that ismuch faster on insertion/erase at the price of a slower lookup?

Subject: Re: [boost] [flat_map] Any interest in a flat_map variant that ismuch faster on insertion/erase at the price of a slower lookup?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-13 15:28:21

Phil Endecott wrote:

> I think we discussed this before.  My preferred approach is
> 
> flat_set S;
> {
>    flat_set::batch b(S);
>    b.insert(xxx);
>    b.insert(yyy);
> }  // b's dtor does the merge

What do you do when b.insert(yyy) throws?