Re: "Must instantiate controlled types at library level." Why?

[Ludovic Brenta <ludovic.brenta@insalien.org>]

Martin Dowie wrote:
> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>> But OK. You state that "The std::vector template class is not a
>> first-class citizen". I haven't a clue as to what that might
>> mean. All a std::vector really is in implementation is a record
>> conatining a length and a couple of pointers. You can pass it and
>> return it by value. It's as "first-class" as anything else in the
>> language.
>
> I think by that, Ludovic meant that std::vector is a library as
> opposed to something built into the language (e.g. int's, float's,
> pointers, etc)..

Yes, that is what I meant.  Basically, std::vector<> does not
eliminate the problems inherent to C++ arrays; it only provides a
workaround.

Hyman also said that a programmer who would have a std::vector<T>*
pointing to an array of vectors would be a stupid programmer.  I
agree, but this is another form of the oft-heard argument that "any
good programmer", etc. which it is not convincing to me.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.


-- 
Use our news server 'news.foorum.com' from anywhere.
More details at: http://nnrpinfo.go.foorum.com/