Re: [Boost-users] boost::weak_ptr and boost::intrusive_ptr

From: Nat Goodspeed (ngoodspeed_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-01 14:58:40

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-users-
> bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Ovanes Markarian
> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 2:23 PM
> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] boost::weak_ptr and boost::intrusive_ptr
> 
> Just a small question:
> 
> Isn't it so, that linked lists (double or single), can be spreaded in
the
> memory, so that cache
> misses and page faults are subject to happen? I think deque is a
better
> choice (which can be
> better optimized in terms of locality)...

[Nat] My suggestion was based on the (implied) intrusive_ptr constraint
of no additional heap resources. But if we were to use a policy-based
approach, a deque implementation could be one of the policies.