Would you know if he's had a chance to take a look at this?
Thanks,
Mehrdad
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:47 AM Hans Dembinski
On 5. Jan 2021, at 23:25, Mehrdad Niknami via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Edit: Actually it just occurred to me there might be a solution for the first issue: an additional "start offset" parameter that gets adjusted by push_front could potentially avoid the performance hit to iterator subtraction. I'm a bit tempted to try to implement it and see if it breaks any assumptions I have, but it might work.
That said though, it still wouldn't substitute for deque, given that the space complexity difference implies some deque users would now need to worry about manually calling reserve & shrink_to_fit (and then deal with having elements get moved), which deque doesn't have any notion of.
Ok, it sounds like it is sufficiently dissimilar from deque to be its own thing. It sounds like a useful addition to boost::container, would be great to hear what Ion Gaztanaga thinks.
Best regards, Hans