--- Bernie Bright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 08:09:32 -0400 > "Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ace project writes: > > > > > > > > > > vector_of_elements.erase(&vector_of_elements[index]); > > > > > > > > I think your are making the too rapid > assumption that > > > > an iterator is a pointer to an element. > > > > > > > Thats the one I ment Fred (my mistake). It works > for > > > me (while I don't know whether is *really* > correct). > > > > FWIW - I think the intended method of the > 'standard' writers is > > > > vector.erase( vector.at( index ) ); > > > > but not all C++ implementations have the > 'conforming' at() method. > > > > AFA IK - at() is in Microsoft V6 and V7 and > g++3.X > > > > Note a conforming vector<T>. at(index) method > > performs a range check on 'index' > > and throws a std::out_of_range exception if index is > out of range. > > Has anyone suggested > > vector.erase( vector.begin() + index ) This looks dangerous, I not sure whether vector implements a operator+ function (mine does NOT). So in mine case I would try to erase a element with address vector.begin()+index, which would not do anything except maybe throw a nasty segfault, since the chances that a element exists with that address is slim. > > yet? > > Bernie > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Just use this code, it guaranteed valid until something invokes vector.resize() (implicit or explicit) vector_of_elements.erase(&vector_of_elements[index]); //range NOT checked or vector_of_elements.erase(&vector_of_elements.at(index)); //range CHECKED I think it works(dont sue me if I'm wrong) because vector_of_elements[index] returns a reference to a element, which can be transformed to a pointer for use by erase(). The [] subscripting operator used here is NOT the same as used by a basic array, thus not just a "pointer to sizeof(elements)*index)" but a overwritten operator (user implemented). My opinion on the use/not use of STL is simple. USE IT! The people who made it probably have more skill/experience in programming that the most of us here (no flame intended) and we know it has been stable in production enviroments for more then 10 years. I always use STL-libs if they are useful above any other lib in single threaded(!) application. Threads are a different case since threading is more dangerous and the STL in not optimized for it. Why invent the wheel twice ? [rant/OT, plz do not argue about it, it is only my opinion, nothing more] I just *hate* the people who felt it needed to force people on using ANSIstring, Cstring, String (and maybe others that I don't know yet). C++ standard includes "string", use it or loose it. [/rant] Leon __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
