At Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:34:57 -0300, Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote:
At first I thought that segmented iterators were what I needed. But then trying to work with it. I found that segmented iterators would differentiate segment iterators from local iterators in a way that didn't work in a tree-like structure.
Yes, they are designed to deal with a segmentation depth that's known at compile-time.
The nodes of the trees had to be moved to be the first in the local sequence because only local iterators are dereferenced in segmented-aware algorithms. This meant that segmented iterators weren't completely overhead-free.
Right. Trees have any storage at internal nodes, which is another way they differ from the kinds of structures segmented iterators work on.
This doesn't mean segmented iterators aren't good, just that the use-case that I tried didn't seem to fit it.
Makes sense. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com