Also, if it is not already possible, those heaps that use an std::vector ir similar internally should have this data-structure as a template argument s.t. we can easily change this. In some application it might even be possible to use boost::array<T,N>.
hm ... not sure about this: the implementations requires push_back/pop_back (which are not available for boost::array) and random access iterators. the std::vector can be configured to use a different allocator using parameters and one can use `reserve' to reserve memory for the vector ...
so i do not really see a specific use case, where one really wants to use a different container, or do you have a specific case?
I think the data structure *could* be adapted to use an array, but the array would have to be adapted to emulate a back insertion sequence. There may be cases where using a deque gives better performance than a vector, especially if the value_type is large (say, > 512B). This could be a moot point since priority queues are almost always used indirectly (with pointers, handles, or descriptors). Those are typically in the 4-32 byte range. I think there's value in considering parameterizing over the container type. There are probably use cases where bounding the heap size is useful. I'd like to know about these use cases before committing to make the change, however. Andrew