From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-31 16:56:58
christopher diggins wrote:
> "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:d7iigr$7tn$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
>> boost::array is just supposed to give built-in arrays a container
>> interface.
>> Built-in arrays never have size 0, so I don't see why boost::arrays
>> should.
I forgot that array allows N = 0 as a special case. Anyway, it has a completely
different meaning than "unitialized"
> It would indicate that the array was not yet initialized and could
> help prevent erroneous use of uninitialized arrays. This behaviour is
> in fact implied by the fact that there exists an empty() function and
> separate size() and max_size() functions. The documentation IMO
> contradicts the intuitive interepretation of the class declaration.
Those functions are for consistency with the STL containers, as you mentioned
before. I'm don't see the contradiction.
Jonathan