From -5344513481311628405 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,bc82bd0900b8b4ac X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-22 03:26:01 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news-x.support.nl!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: sirwillard@my-deja.com Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Feature Request: Fast "find" for sorted random access containers Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 11:25:25 GMT Organization: Deja.com Approved: Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++ Message-ID: <91u1uu$18$1@nnrp1.deja.com> References: <3A3F63A6.527B4E5D@wizard.net> <91qnl7$86m$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <91t6j2$7cf$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 977484332 mail2news:3787 mail2news mail2news.demon.co.uk X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!mulga.cs.mu.oz.au X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Dec 21 22:58:41 2000 GMT X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0) X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 cacdca02, 1.1 x62.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 167.16.75.51, 170.186.97.229 X-Mydeja-Info: XMYDJUIDsirwillard Lines: 64 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.std.c++:3078 In article , remove.haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg) wrote: > In article <91t6j2$7cf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Niklas Mellin > wrote: > >Isn't an error reported by the compiler the same thing as a diagnostic > >in most cases? > > I do not know what you mean with a "diagnostic". For a compiler, an > "error" is a message that aborts the compiler output, whereas a "warning" > is a message that still produces the object code output. >From the standard: [defns.diagnostic] 1.3.2 diagnostic message a message belonging to an implementation-defined subset of the implementation_s output messages. Both warnings and errors are diagnostics. > In the context we discussed here, it was said that one didn't implement > operator +, -, [], ... on the "list" class because it one thought people > might using the without being aware of that is inefficient. Yes. Though I'd also go as far as to say it's not only inefficient, but wrong. Using operator[] denotes random access, which is something you can't do with a list. > So I got the impression it was a kind of informational statement to the > effect that the algorithm is inefficient. But if one is using such an > algorithm, there should be a way to turn off the diagnostic message. There is... use the alternative interface "std::advance". > -- Perhaps this is a good suggestion, that one can put in macro directives like > #warning list::operator[] is inefficient > or > #info Have a nice day! This simply wouldn't work. You only want a diagnostic to be given if the user attempts to use them. A #warning would generate a diagnostic simply by including the header. -- William E. Kempf Software Engineer, MS Windows Programmer Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ] [ Note that the FAQ URL has changed! Please update your bookmarks. ]