9 Jun
2009
9 Jun
'09
12:29 p.m.
Hi Joaquín, I concur. Also, replicating container classes for the sake of avoiding this
little boilerplate code is a maintenance bottleneck.
STL isn't rapidly changed. I agree that my proposal is not complete with all forwarding construction parameters. But they are readily added if the underlying idea is accepted. People will expect that a monotonic::foo<..> is like a foo<..>, and they will accept that it requires a storage argument. But they will find it harder to accept that it requires retooling from a type-argument level of the allocator. Regards, Christian.