🚀 go-pugleaf

jbuck@Synopsys.COM (Joe Buck) wrote:
>
>Rohan Lenard asks:
>>> Why is there no auto_array_ptr in the DWP ? Is it an omission or a mistake ?
>
>Nathan Myers <ncm@netcom.com> writes:
>>Neither.  The feeling in the committee was that that would be too close to
>>vector<>.  I.e. when you think you want an auto_array_ptr, consider using
>>a vector<> instead.  
>
>In my humble opinion, this is a mistake; vector<> is a far bigger chunk of
>code than auto_array_ptr<> and supports functionality beyond what a natural
>auto_array_ptr would supply.

Actually, this need not be the case. If you _use_ a vector
"as if" it were a less kind of array type, the code
for the "extra" functionality won't be generated.
If the use is lexically restricted to a block, then
in theory a compiler could optimise vector to work exactly
like a dynamically allocated array.

Remember vector isn't really a template, it's a built in 
structuring tool of the C++ language just like 
"array" or "struct" is.

Don't expect this kind of optimisation right away -- 
we need stable working ISO C++ implementations first.


-- 
John Max Skaller               voice: 61-2-566-2189
81 Glebe Point Rd              fax:   61-2-660-0850
GLEBE NSW 2037                 email: maxtal@suphys.physics.oz.au
AUSTRALIA                      email: skaller@maxtal.com.au



[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]