18 Jan
2011
18 Jan
'11
10:04 p.m.
On 18/01/2011 22:43, Steven Watanabe wrote:
AMDG
On 1/18/2011 1:36 PM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
I'm a bit puzzled at one thing though: why is object_pool::free O(n)? Couldn't it be O(1) like for the other interfaces? I suppose that's because it tries to be order preserving, but I don't see any reason why that should be forced on users.
It has to be order preserving to make the destructor work.
Albeit that's true in the general case, I believe it would still work fine for many cases.