Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map
From: Michael Schlenger (Michi-Schlenger_at_web.de)
Date: 06/14/04
- Next message: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Previous message: Martin Seiringer: "Re: Is there some way to call virtual function in Destructor?"
- In reply to: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Next in thread: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Reply: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Reply: Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:31:29 GMT
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:19:51 -0400, "P.J. Plauger"
<pjp@dinkumware.com> wrote:
>The C++ committee is producing a (non-normative) Technical Report
>that adds tons of things to the Standard C++ library. Part of that
>tonnage is the template classes unordered_[multi]{map set}, which
>form a standardized replacement for the various hash containers
>knocking about.
Where can I learn about these things?
------------------------------------------------
Michael Schlenger
------------------------------------------------
- Next message: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Previous message: Martin Seiringer: "Re: Is there some way to call virtual function in Destructor?"
- In reply to: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Next in thread: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Reply: P.J. Plauger: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Reply: Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]: "Re: Poor performance from stdext::hash_map"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|