3 ms·
Doesn't it contradicts the 'bloat free' requirement, if every library needs to have its own version of std::list std::vector, std::unordered_map etc ? I mean:
by MichaelMoser123 3y ago
Doesn't it contradicts the 'bloat free' requirement, if every library needs to have its own version of std::list std::vector, std::unordered_map etc ?
I mean: i remember the days, when each and every project had its own string class.
- MathMonkeyMan 3y agoThe implementations of vector, list, and unordered_map in every standard library I've used have been sufficient for every C++ library I've worked on. There are special cases, and there are engineering politics, but it's all basically fine.
- pagghiu 3y agoThe bloat free is more referring to executable size, build complexity, compile time and in general to hidden complexity. Every library having its own version of common data structure is unfortunately something that C++ programmers can't really seem to agree on :)