On Saturday, 2 August 2014 at 15:46:31 UTC, Xinok wrote:
On Saturday, 2 August 2014 at 14:49:49 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Xinok:
I do wonder if we should generalize an interface for these
types of ranges.
First of all you need some use cases and usage examples.
Bye,
bearophile
The most obvious use case is generic functions that can operate
on associative ranges of any type, regardless of
implementation. There are various ways to implement and
optimize hash tables for specific use cases, so it would be
convenient not to be restricted to a single container.
+1, I'd like to add that compiler is a good example of were this
is useful. You'll have quick/small/throwaway and only growing map
- to keep track of unwinding infos, break/continue/labels status,
switch processing -, long lived one that only grow (and can grow
big) - template instance cache, symbol table - as well as map
where element goes in and out all the time - for internal
machinery -.
Optimal algorithms for these use case are different, and it'd be
great if part of the code could be factorized.
For info, SDC only uses out of the box hashmaps for now, but
could benefit from better implementations - and doing so is
waaaayyyyyy down the priority queue.
