On 2/20/06, Bill Buklis <boostuser@pbjzone.com> wrote:
[snip]
The only point of #1 is so that the iterators behave exactly like std::map iterators, right? One the one hand, that would be nice for consistency with std::map, but then this is a different class with slightly different uses, so I personally don't mind if it has slightly different characteristics. And the usefulness of operator-> as T* outweighs the need for identical behavior, IMO.
I had some issues with using std::ptr_map in generic algorithms because of
Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote: this.
I think that the inner typedef's of std::ptr_map, wrt iterator concept modelling, must be carefully choosed too. That can break a lot of generic code to not work on ptr_map or other ptr_containers.
So you want to ensure that map::value_type v = *iter; map::reference r = *iter; map::pointer p = &*iter; works and return something with first and second members? This is almost in place ... I still need to change the internals of map iterators to precompute the tuple of references ... right now I compute them on demand. I suspect this will make iteration somewhat slower. -Thorsten