Re: [C++] Should the complexity of std::list::size() be O(n) or O(1)?

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Howard Hinnant <hhinnant@apple.com> writes:

[...]

| My position isn't that a doubly-linked list should have an O(1)  size.
| It is that if a container, any container, has a size(), then  that
| member should be O(1) (same for operator[], at, swap, max_size,
| capacity, begin, end, front, back, push/pop_front, push/pop_back,
| empty, default ctor,  -- perhaps amortized O(1) on some of those).

so the next battle is to make map<>::operator[] O(1)? 
That one might be more useful to me than making list<>::size O(1) ;-p

-- Gaby