Section: 23.2.2 [container.requirements.general] Status: C++11 Submitter: Alisdair Meredith Opened: 2009-03-12 Last modified: 2016-01-28
Priority: Not Prioritized
View other active issues in [container.requirements.general].
View all other issues in [container.requirements.general].
View all issues with C++11 status.
Discussion:
Addresses UK 222 [CD1]
It is not clear what purpose the Requirement tables serve in the
Containers clause. Are they the definition of a library Container? Or
simply a conventient shorthand to factor common semantics into a single
place, simplifying the description of each subsequent container? This
becomes an issue for 'containers' like array
, which does not meet the
default-construct-to-empty requirement, or forward_list
which does not
support the size operation. Are these components no longer containers?
Does that mean the remaining requirements don't apply? Or are these
contradictions that need fixing, despite being a clear design decision?
Recommend:
Clarify all the tables in 23.2 [container.requirements] are
there as a convenience for documentation, rather than a strict set of
requirements. Containers should be allowed to relax specific
requirements if they call attention to them in their documentation. The
introductory text for array
should be expanded to mention a
default constructed array
is not empty, and
forward_list
introduction should mention it does not provide
the required size
operation as it cannot be implemented
efficiently.
[ Summit: ]
Agree in principle.
[ 2009-07 post-Frankfurt: ]
We agree in principle, but we have a timetable. This group feels that the issue should be closed as NAD unless a proposed resolution is submitted prior to the March 2010 meeting.
[ 2009-10 Santa Cruz: ]
Looked at this and still intend to close as NAD in March 2010 unless there is proposed wording that we like.
[ 2010-02-02 Nicolai M. Josuttis updates proposed wording and adds: ]
I just came across issue #1034 (response to UK 222), which covers the role of container requirements. The reason I found this issue was that I am wondering why
array<>
is specified to be a sequence container. For me, currently, this follows from Sequence containers 23.2.4 [sequence.reqmts] saying:The library provides five basic kinds of sequence containers:
array
,vector
,forward_list
,list
, anddeque
. while later on in Table 94 "Sequence container requirements" are defined.IMO, you can hardly argue that this is NAD. We MUST say somewhere that either array is not a sequence container or does not provide all operations of a sequence container (even not all requirements of a container in general).
Here is the number of requirements
array<>
does not meet (AFAIK):general container requirements:
- a default constructed
array
is not emptyswap
has no constant complexityNote also that
swap
not only has linear complexity it also invalidates iterators (or to be more precise, assigns other values to the elements), which is different from the effect swap has for other containers. For this reason, I must say that i tend to propose to removeswap()
forarrays
.sequence container requirements:
- There is no constructor and assignment for a range
- There is no constructor and assignment for
n
copies oft
- There are no
emplace
,insert
,erase
,clear
,assign
operationsIn fact, out of all sequence container requirements
array<>
only provides the following operations: from sequence requirements (Table 94):X(il); a = il;and from optional requirements (Table 95):
[], at(), front(), back()This is almost nothing!
Note in addition, that due to the fact that
array
is an aggregate and not a container withinitializer_lists
a construction or assignment with an initializer list is valid for all sequence containers but not valid for array:vector<int> v({1,2,3}); // OK v = {4,5,6}; // OK array<int,3> a({1,2,3}); // Error array<int,3> a = {1,2,3}; // OK a = {4,5,6}; // ErrorBTW, for this reason, I am wondering, why
<array>
includes<initializer_list>
.IMO, we can't really say that
array
is a sequence container.array
is special. As the solution to this issue seemed to miss some proposed wording where all could live with, let me try to suggest some.
[ 2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. ]
[ 2010 Pittsburgh: Ok with move to Ready except for "OPEN:" part. ]
Proposed resolution:
In Sequence containers 23.2.4 [sequence.reqmts] modify paragraph 1 as indicated:
1 A sequence container organizes a finite set of objects, all of the same type, into a strictly linear arrangement. The library provides
fivefour basic kinds of sequence containers:array
,vector
,forward_list
,list
, anddeque
. In addition,array
is provided as a sequence container that only provides limited sequence operations because it has a fixed number of elements.ItThe library also provides container adaptors that make it easy to construct abstract data types, such asstack
s orqueue
s, out of the basic sequence container kinds (or out of other kinds of sequence containers that the user might define).
Modify paragraph 2 as follows (just editorial):
2 The
five basicsequence containers offer the programmer different complexity trade-offs and should be used accordingly.vector
orarray
is the type of sequence container that should be used by default.list
orforward_list
should be used when there are frequent insertions and deletions from the middle of the sequence.deque
is the data structure of choice when most insertions and deletions take place at the beginning or at the end of the sequence.
In Class template array 23.3.3 [array] modify paragraph 3 as indicated:
3
Unless otherwise specified, allAn array satisfies all of the requirements of a container and of a reversible container (given in two tables in 23.2 [container.requirements]) except that a default constructedarray
operations are as described in 23.2.array
is not empty,swap
does not have constant complexity, andswap
may throw exceptions. Anarray
satisfies some of the requirements of a sequence container (given in 23.2.4 [sequence.reqmts]). Descriptions are provided here only for operations onarray
that are not describedin that Clausein one of these tables or for operations where there is additional semantic information.
In array specialized algorithms 23.3.3.4 [array.special] add to the
specification of swap()
:
template <class T, size_t N> void swap(array<T,N>& x, array<T,N>& y);1 Effects: ...
Complexity: Linear in
N
.