It seems I missed the container review, it does look like that would suffice. The simplicity of the StaticVector implementation may still make it useful for cases where all you really need are a simple array and a size, in the same way that boost.array is useful for an array alone. However, its entirely possible that StaticVector is now redundant, and that's why I'm asking if there is any interest. :-) I've also tried to come up with a better name for it, but that is the best I could think of. Any better naming suggestions around? Cheers! Andrew Hundt On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 5:59 AM, Joel falcou <joel.falcou@gmail.com> wrote:
On 14/08/11 11:55, Andrew Hundt wrote:
Sample Code: StaticVector<std::size_t,3> three; three.push_back(5); three.push_back(2); // size: 2 capacity: 3 three.push_back(3);
three.push_back(1); // throws std::out_of_range exception indicating the capacity has been exceeded
Can't this just be done using Boost.Container or any stateful allcoator aware container implementation with a stateful allocator holding the static allocated block of memory ?
______________________________**_________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/** mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost<http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost>