RFC: Optimization for stl_tree.h - Ignore

[Dhruv Matani]

Sorry! I just realized that the comparison *FUNCTION* may be a function
too ;-) So, we may not derive from it.


My apologies to all.



On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 19:00, Dhruv Matani wrote:
> I'd like to know the opinion of the implementors of rb_tree and
> otherwise on the likelyhood of the following being conformant, and being
> accepted if done:
> 
> Create 2 base classes: (A) _Rb_tree_node_alloc_base and (B)
> _Rb_tree_count_cmp_base each having the responsibility of maintaining:
> 
> 	(A)_Rb_tree_node_alloc_base: _Rb_tree_node_base and derives from the
> allocator, and:
> 	(B)_Rb_tree_count_cmp_base: _M_node_count and derives from
> _M_key_compare.
> 
> Because the comparison function would most likely be empty as well.
> 
> At first sight, it looks a bit ugly to me, but it has its benefits.
-- 
	-Dhruv Matani.
http://www.geocities.com/dhruvbird/