From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-16 19:09:07
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> In some sense it seems like we're trying to cram two different
> classes into one. The indirect behavior could be provided by one
> (or three) containers of the form
I'm starting to agree.
> template< class Sequence >
> indirect_sequence;
>
> template< class Set >
> indirect_set;
>
> template< class Map >
> indirect_map;
>
> This might belong in a different library.
VTL, perhaps.
If indirection is not really the unifying theme, perhaps you should use the name
Boost.ManagedContainer, which I think was suggested at some point.
('ManagingContainer' might be more correct, but doesn't sound good.)
Jonathan