Boost logo

Glas :

Re: [glas] unallocated fill

From: Kresimir Fresl (fresl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-03 08:30:08


Karl Meerbergen wrote:

> Neal Becker wrote:

[...]
>>Thanks. The free function is fine. I suggested this because it is consistent
>>with STL, so maybe more familiar.

> Consistency with STL is a strong argument though. So, perhaps we should
> consider it for a dense_vector. For a sparse_vector, it does not make
> sense, I suppose.

> To what extent do we want to be consistent with STL? I suppose the
> answer is very personal.

I think that internal consistency is more important. So, if
sparse_vector does not have initializing constructor, than
dense_vector should not have it, too. But, it's just my
opinion.

Regards,

fres