Re: [Boost-users] [multi_index] are indices in a random access index stable on addition, can we have an

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [multi_index] are indices in a random access index stable on addition, can we have an
From: Joaquin M LópezMuñoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-27 05:34:00

Nick Stokes <randomaccessiterator <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I have a stream of pairs of elements of type T, Â and want to insert
> individual T's uniquely into a container and convert the pairs to a
> pair of indices into this container [...]
> 
> typedef bmi::multi_index_container< T, bmi::indexed_by
> Â  Â < bmi::hashed_unique< bmi::identity<T> >
> Â  Â , Â bmi::random_access<>
> Â  Â >> MIC;
>
> [...]
> 
> auto index_of = [&]( MIC::const_iterator i ) {Â 
> Â  Â return elements.project<1>(i) - elements.get<1>().begin();
> }
> 
> So my questions are
> 
> (1) Â Is the implementation of index_of() correct?
> (or better, is there something like this already for random
> access indices)

This is correct and gives you the *insertion* order, if this is
indeed¡…Ёå½ÔÉ”¥¹Ñ•É•ÍÑ•¥¸¸€((ø€ Ȥ%́ѡ”Ý…äÑ¡•ä…É”ÕÍ•¥¸…‰½Ù”±½½ÀÍÑ…‰±”°Ý¡•É”•±•µ•¹ÑÌ(ø…É”¥¹Í•ÉÑ•…™Ñ•È…¸¥¹‘•à¥Ì½‰Ñ…¥¹•ü()%Ё¥ÌÍÑ…‰±”…́±½¹œ…́å½Ô‘½¸Ð•É…Í”•±•µ•¹Ñ̸()!Q ())½…Å×µ¸43ÍÁ•è5׎è)Q•±•›͹¥