On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Christian Schladetsch<christian.schladetsch@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Cory,
My largest complaint with C++ is that containers do not fit well with high-perf low-overhead scenarios, so I'm very interested in seeing something like this.
I would want to see it taken a step further though. Overhead can be a big deal for large objects, so re-implementing string and vector completely (so that you don't have the pointer/capacity specified twice, in container & allocator) would be a welcome change.
I don't think anyone doing high-performance code uses std::string. It is a nightmare, and similarly for std::vector, for the reasons you claim. However, re-writing these is not what I wish to do here...
Let the user specify storage manually and throw if you go over it.
That is precisely what my proposal does.
Make default copying just copy the pointers around instead of all data.
We can't lose value semantics for containers by default.
Where does the copy constructor get the new storage from? -- Cory Nelson http://int64.org