Re: [boost] [container] small_flat_set and small_flat_map

Subject: Re: [boost] [container] small_flat_set and small_flat_map
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-19 14:00:44

On 10/19/16 20:51, Chris Glover wrote:
>
> But, typically set or map is chosen precisely because there will be many
> items in the container, otherwise you would choose something else, like an
> unsorted array like structure. So, to me the case of optimising for the
> small size makes little sense.

I would say that it's likely the opposite - larger flat containers will 
have more expensive insert and erase. Flat containers are especially 
useful with small number of (small) elements because they are 
cache-friendly, and small size optimization makes perfect sense to 
improve that use case even further.