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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk