There are some potential reuse opportunities inside STL. I haven't seen
them exploited and I wonder whether there is a reason for this.

Two that come to mind are using vector for holding the map of pointers
inside deque, and using set<list<Element> > and map<list<Element> > for
implementing multiset, respectively multimap.

Would this be valid in an STL implementation?

Andrei


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
---
[ 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://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html              ]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> There are some potential reuse opportunities inside STL. I haven't seen
> them exploited and I wonder whether there is a reason for this.
>
> Two that come to mind are using vector for holding the map of pointers
> inside deque, and using set<list<Element> > and map<list<Element> > for
> implementing multiset, respectively multimap.
>
> Would this be valid in an STL implementation?

HP STL and implementations based on it do it another
way: set, map, multiset and multimap are warpers for
rb_tree.

And yes, it's probably a way to implement multiset.
Of course you would not write set<list<Element> >, nor
map<list<Element> > (which is a syntax error).

But writing multiset<T> in term of set<list<Element>, ...>
is really a lot of work.

I would rather implement set in term of multiset !

--

Valentin Bonnard
---
[ 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://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html              ]