From: Phil Endecott (spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-08 16:42:06
I have had a look at the Time Series docs and it looks like a
worthwhile library, though I have not done anything recently with
time-indexed data that could use it.
I have, however, had to deal with sparse vs. dense data structure
decisions with other index types, e.g. integers; this leads me to
wonder what ties this library specifically to _time_ series.
One of the elements of this library is a pair of containers that have a
common interface but store their contents either in a dense or a sparse
structure. I wonder whether it would be worth generalising those
containers to make them applicable to non-time applications - and to
make them as close to standard library containers as possible. One way
to approach this would be to think about how a std::map-like interface
can be presented to a std::vector, and/or how a std::vector-like
interface can be presented to a std::map. My motivation is that I
sometimes find myself with code like this:
typedef std::map<int,T> T_container; // I'm not sure yet if this is
best stored in a sparse
T_container tt; // (map) or dense (vector)
structure, but by making
// it a typedef I can easily
change it later.
Of course, when I change the typedef from map<int,T> to vector<T> I
discover that there are plenty of other places where I have to change
the code; for example I have to add or remove '->second' wherever I
dereference an iterator. How about:
dense_map<int,T> : provides the interface of std::map<int,T> (or a
subset of it), implemented using a vector. Needs to grow the vector
when something is inserted.
sparse_vector<T> : provides the interface of std::vector<T> (or a
subset of it), implemented using a map. Needs an iterator that can
point to gaps between the map elements.
How close do the sparse and dense time series containers come to this?
Regards,
Phil.