On 22/07/2010 23:00, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
collections has a feature where you can swap the underlying
implementation for something completely different.
ATM I find it pretty hard to implement an other underlying
implementation for dcollections.
Say an LL RBTree or an Skiplist for dcollections.
1) You've placed a couple of things into the node structure. and IMO it
is not always clear why.
2) I am still not happy with your Node(V) instead of Node(K,V) decision.
I know about your reasons, but to be honest with you, I am not sure if
it's worh the additional programming effort needed for a key-value
implementation OR the reduced lines of code just to generalize the
node/tree so that it can also handle a vector. f.i)
For me this reduction to c!V . (funny enough) creates old bloated/messed
up code
void* abc(int i, bool A = true, bool B = true, int
in_a_very_special_case_here_another_thingy = 0, int
cause_DEF_requires_this_param = 0)
But heck I can be wrong. Still, comparing for equality seems to be
bloated, and (somebody else raises this up), how to implement multi-
index with just having c!(V)
my 2 cents
Bjoern
