[Bug libstdc++/41975] unordered_set::erase performs worse when nearly empty

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-11-28 23:16 -------
An implementation is probably expected to shrink bucket_count when size
shrinks, so the complexity should still be O(size).  That would be good
for memory use anyway, so why's that not done?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41975