Markus Wanner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Zack Weinberg wrote: >> Sure, but C++98 requires size() to be O(1) for every container, so >> there's really no excuse for a 4-15% performance difference. > > Hm.. I didn't know that, thanks.
Just because the standard says that doesn't mean that it's so in implementations, of course. For example size() in SGI's list may be linear: <http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/List.html>. The standard uses odd terminology (I think, anyway). There's a table in 23.1 showing the operations and complexities, and some of the complexities are "constant", and some are "(Note A)". This is explained below the table: "Those entries marked ‘‘(Note A)’’ should have constant complexity." I wonder if that's an RFC-style "should"? I don't have a more recent standard---perhaps this has changed? _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
