"Andy Little" <andy@servocomm.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:e2c9jq$c8g$1@sea.gmane.org...
"Gennadiy Rozental" wrote
"Andy Little" wrote
"Andy Little" wrote
Did you consider a generic tree design? If so why did you reject it in favour of this one?
Just to refresh... The above is the most interesting and yet unanswered question about property tree for me. Am I missing something? Is this a silly question? Is it too trivial to answer?
IMO the same result (as library presents) could be achieved just by using multi_index.
There is a concept of a Path in Property Tree whereas multi_index has no path concept but rather a unique key per element and concerns itself with returning a particular view on a flat set of data. OTOH the tree is a fixed hierarchical structure where the position of an element in the structure is relevent (two elements can have the same name but can be distinguished by their positions), whereas multi_index presents a subset of a flat (non hierarchical) collection of elements. In the tree the particular properties of the elements plays no part in their ordering, whereas in multi_index their ordering in a particular view is a direct function of some particular properties of the elements.
IOW there seems to me to be a great deal of difference between Tree and Multi-index.
I never said say are the same. I said "could be". It also "could be" achieved with use of some tree data structure. And in some cases just plain std::map will surface either. Gennadiy