[jira] Commented: (STDCXX-995) __rw_new_capacity() doesn't control map, set

["Martin Sebor (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-995?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12653359#action_12653359 ] 

Martin Sebor commented on STDCXX-995:
-------------------------------------

It's an interesting idea but I have a couple of concerns with the proposed patch:

 # it's binary incompatible
 # it seems a bit heavy-weight

By ??heavy-weight?? I mean that this type of a circular dependency (a template using another with the first as an argument to the second) has been problematic in the past (it tends to cause issues during instantiation when type completeness is required). Passing the type of the container (e.g., {{std::map}}) as {{_Owner}} to the implementation template ({{\_\_rw::\_\_rb_tree}}) as an entire new parameter also seems to obviates the need for several of the other parameters (e.g., {{_Key}}, {{_Val}}, and {{_Alloc}}) as they could be extracted from {{_Owner}}. That said, I think this extraction would further increase the coupling between the templates and exacerbate the instantiation problem.

> __rw_new_capacity() doesn't control map, set
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: STDCXX-995
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-995
>             Project: C++ Standard Library
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: 23. Containers
>    Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4, 4.2.0, 4.2.1
>            Reporter: Martin Sebor
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 4.2.2
>
>         Attachments: stdcxx-995.patch
>
>   Original Estimate: 2h
>  Remaining Estimate: 2h
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re:  Controlling allocation policy of STL set.
> Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 17:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dennis Handly <dhandly AT cup DOT hp DOT com>
> To: sebor AT roguewave DOT com
> CC: boris.gubenko AT hp DOT com, dhandly AT cup DOT hp DOT com, premanand.rao AT hp DOT com
> We had this question from a user recently.  I was able to reverse engineer
> how to do this with map/set.
> Is this level of difficulty known?
> Here is a link where we mention the info about {{__rw_new_capacity}}:
> http://docs.hp.com/en/10946/libs.htm#container_alloc
> I would be nice if we could just use the private typedef
> {{std::map<K,V>::__rep_type}}.
> Then we could just use:
> {noformat}
> #include <set>
> typedef std::set<key_type> BlagPset;
> typedef BlagPset::__rep_type BlagPtree;
> // forward
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<BlagPtree>(size_t size, BlagPtree const*);
> {noformat}
> Do you see any issues with making {{__rep_type}} public?
> (Your Apache code still has it private but as {{_C_repT}}.)
> ===========================================================================
> Do you know why the following code fragment does not work for me?
> i.e it controls the vector's allocation policy as I expect, but not the
> set's. I can believe there is some stupid mistake in there, but I have been
> staring at it for a while now...
> {noformat}
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <vector>
> #include <set>
> class Blag { int a; };
> std::vector<Blag*> bvec;
> std::set<Blag*> bset;
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<std::vector<Blag*> >(size_t size,
>                                       std::vector<Blag*> const*) {
>     if (size == 0) {
>         fprintf(stderr, "Initial size will be 8 for vector\n");
>         return 8;
>     } else
>         return size * 2;
> }
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<std::set<Blag*> >(size_t size,
>                                        std::set<Blag*> const*) {
>     if (size == 0) {
>         fprintf(stderr, "Initial size will be 8 for set\n");
>         return 8;
>     } else
>         return size * 2;
> }
> int main() {
>     bset.insert(0);
>     bvec.push_back(0);
> }
> {noformat}
> ===========================================================================
> >From: Dennis Handly <dhandly AT cup DOT hp DOT com>
> >Do you know why the following code fragment does not work for me?
> Storage isn't allocated for the set but by the {{__rbtree}}.
> >I can believe there is some stupid mistake in there
> It isn't easy, you have to find the {{__rw_new_capacity call}}.
> {noformat}
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <vector>
> class Blag { int a; };
> typedef Blag* key_type;
> // start kludge
> #include <functional>
> namespace __rw {
> template <class _Key, class _Val, class _KeyOf, class _Comp, class _Alloc>
> class __rb_tree;
> template <class _TypeT, class _TypeU>
> struct __ident;
> } // namespace __rw
> typedef __rw::__rb_tree<key_type, key_type, __rw::__ident<key_type, key_type>,
>                         std::less<key_type>, std::allocator<key_type> >
>                         BlagPtree;
> // forward
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<BlagPtree>(size_t size, BlagPtree const*);
> // end kludge
> #include <set>
> typedef std::vector<key_type> BlagPvec;
> typedef std::set<key_type> BlagPset;
> BlagPvec bvec;
> BlagPset bset;
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<BlagPvec>(size_t size, BlagPvec const*) {
>     if (size == 0) {
>         fprintf(stderr, "Initial size will be 8 for vector\n");
>         return 8;
>     } else
>         return size * 2;
> }
> // useless
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<BlagPset>(size_t size, BlagPset const*) {
>     if (size == 0) {
>         fprintf(stderr, "Initial size will be 8 for set\n");
>         return 8;
>     } else
>         return size * 2;
> }
> template<>
> inline size_t __rw::__rw_new_capacity<BlagPtree>(size_t size, BlagPtree const*){
>     if (size == 0) {
>         fprintf(stderr, "Initial size will be 8 for tree\n");
>         return 8;
>     } else
>         return size * 2;
> }
> int main() {
>     bset.insert(0);
>     bvec.push_back(0);
> }
> {noformat}

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.