Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] The review of Boost.DoubleEnded starts today: September 21 - September 30
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-09-27 20:50:16

On 27/09/2017 21:27, Thorsten Ottosen via Boost wrote:
> Den 26-09-2017 kl. 23:43 skrev Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost:
>> El 21/09/2017 a las 19:38, Thorsten Ottosen via Boost escribió:
>>> Dear users and members of Boost,
> [snip]
>> and mostly utility-level. We already have a bestiary of containers in
>> Boost, namely
>> Boost.Container, so I think both devector and batch_deque are better
>> served if proposed
>> as components of this latter libray. Code in
>> boost::double_ended::detail can go to / merge
>> into boost::container[::detail] --for instance,
>> boost::double_ended::detail::allocator_traits
>> seems to be redundant with boost::containter::allocator_traits.
> This makes sense, but it does require that the author of Boost.Container
> is willing to entertain that idea, doesn't it?

I haven't reviewed the library yet, and I can't tell yow feasible is
this. Something similar happened wrt static_vector and stable_vector.
However, Boost.Container still supports C++03 and other features, so the
implementation should be updated to match the rest of the library (if
tests are good enough that should not be a problem). devector definitely
looks interesting, I haven't investigated yet the essential differences
between boost::container::deque and batch_deque.



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