From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-14 09:42:03
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
> Summary of my position:
>
> * The "append" that, well, appends, should be retained under its current
> name. (I can definitely live without its current push_back behavior.)
I agree.
> * I see good arguments against providing a "push_back."
I have mixed feelings about this. Surely some people (who use
Codewarrior ;^>) will not care about compile times for some applications,
and will only care that their code is flexible or easy-to-write.
Maybe the right solution is to pick a different name for the function which
works on any sequence, and reserve push_back for type_vector and others
where it can be reasonably efficient.
-Dave