Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #11570

Re: STL vector

Newsgroups comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: STL vector
References <op.v4z6q8m5vc68pg@hp2011.workgroup> <ZvadnW6_dOYbX17TnZ2dnUVZ8nmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Date 2011-11-17 16:45 +0100
From "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch>
Message-ID <op.v43kphuxvc68pg@hp2011.workgroup> (permalink)
Organization hispeed.ch

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:02:44 +0100, Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote:

> On 15/11/2011 19:50, Peter Liedermann wrote:

> If you are going to allocate the Jumbo objects separately for use in  
> vector<Jumbo*> then you might as well just use std::set<Jumbo>; std::set  
> will keep the items sorted.
>

Thank you for the suggestion.  However, I am not going to use set because  
I occasionally have to re-sort.  In my case, this resort would be quite  
intense, that is, almost everything is repositioned each time.  This is  
definitely not a hot spot in the algorithm, but I do not want to swear  
that it occurs at most so and so often.  For this reason, I want to avoid  
tree-like structures, which an STL set essentially is.

But BTW, this takes us back to a variation the original question: Would  
you, given the use of a set, really use std::set<Jumbo> or std::set<Jumbo  
*> instead and does it make a difference
(that is, does replacing "vector" by "set" in the original question make a  
difference)

Regards.
Peter

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

STL vector "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch> - 2011-11-15 20:50 +0100
  Re: STL vector Marcel Müller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.com> - 2011-11-15 21:30 +0100
    Re: STL vector Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-15 21:13 +0000
      Re: STL vector Marcel Müller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.com> - 2011-11-15 22:46 +0100
        Re: STL vector Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-15 22:02 +0000
          Re: STL vector / Heap fragmentation "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch> - 2011-11-16 09:02 +0100
            Re: STL vector / Heap fragmentation Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 00:39 -0800
              Re: STL vector / Heap fragmentation "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch> - 2011-11-16 10:58 +0100
                Re: STL vector / Heap fragmentation Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 04:12 -0800
    Re: STL vector "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch> - 2011-11-16 08:55 +0100
      Re: STL vector yatremblay@bel1lin202.(none) (Yannick Tremblay) - 2011-11-16 16:54 +0000
      Re: STL vector Joe Gottman <josephgottman@comcast.net> - 2011-11-16 18:22 -0500
  Re: STL vector Joe Gottman <josephgottman@comcast.net> - 2011-11-15 21:59 -0500
    Re: STL vector "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch> - 2011-11-16 08:58 +0100
  Re: STL vector Werner <werasm@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 05:53 -0800
  Re: STL vector Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-16 14:02 +0000
    Re: STL vector Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-16 14:05 +0000
    Re: STL vector "Peter Liedermann" <peter09876@hispeed.ch> - 2011-11-17 16:45 +0100
      Re: STL vector Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-17 16:19 +0000
      Re: STL vector Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-11-17 15:19 -0800

csiph-web