skaller@nospam.com.au ("John Max Skaller") wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.15.02.43.17.939704@nospam.com.au>...
> I wonder if someone could report the current status of
> proposals to add hashtable based containers to C++,
> as outlined in N1456 or otherwise?

See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1687.pdf.
Note that this is a draft, and there are still a number of open issues
which will cause the details to change.

> In particular, any comments on choice of header
> names, container names, access to TR1 based
> extensions for existing compilers, particularly in respect
> of migration strategy, would be appreciated.

Most of the major standard library suppliers have indicated they are
working on implementing the TR, which hopefully will be finalized at
the Redmond meeting in two weeks. Some suppliers (Metrowerks, for
example) are already shipping at least some of the TR components.
Implementations of many of the components are also available at
www.boost.org.

HTH,

--Beman

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 22:16:52 +0000, Beman Dawes wrote:

[Thx for link to file ..]

Ah, ok, 'unordered' rather than 'hash' is chosen.

> Implementations of many of the components are also available at
> www.boost.org.

Where exactly? I actually looked (yikes .. boost took several
hours to build on my box .. ) but couldn't find any hashtable
stuff.


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

""John Max Skaller"" wrote:

> > Implementations of many of the components are also available at
> > www.boost.org.
>
> Where exactly? I actually looked (yikes .. boost took several
> hours to build on my box .. ) but couldn't find any hashtable
> stuff.
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/
file jtc1-sc22-wg21-2003-n1456.tar.gz

You need to have Yahoo account and
be member of Boost mail-list.
I may send you the file directly.

/Pavel


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

skaller@nospam.com.au ("John Max Skaller") wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.17.04.13.26.671112@nospam.com.au>...
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 22:16:52 +0000, Beman Dawes wrote:
>
> [Thx for link to file ..]
>
> Ah, ok, 'unordered' rather than 'hash' is chosen.
>
> > Implementations of many of the components are also available at
> > www.boost.org.
>
> Where exactly? I actually looked (yikes .. boost took several
> hours to build on my box .. ) but couldn't find any hashtable
> stuff.

Sorry, Boost doesn't currently include a hashed container library:-(

--Beman

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

I wonder if someone could report the current status of
proposals to add hashtable based containers to C++,
as outlined in N1456 or otherwise?

In particular, any comments on choice of header
names, container names, access to TR1 based
extensions for existing compilers, particularly in respect
of migration strategy, would be appreciated.

As background, my first order requirement is to provide wrappers
for a subset of the functionality these containers
provide in a manner which is as invisible as possible
to the client, for example, by having a configuration script
test several possible ways to get at this functionality.

A second order requirement involves reimplementing
all STL containers to use a GC based memory management
strategy. For already standardised containers this is
difficult, for those such as the hash containers
the lack of standardisation introduces additional complexity
which I'd like to minimise.

[skaller (at) users (dot) sourceforge (dot) net]


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]