|
|
|
|
|
by rumanator
2309 days ago
|
|
> You have that backwards. The STL containers are for when you have a hyper-specific niche use case. That assertion makes no sense at all. The stl contrainers work very well as basic generic containers that can safely be used for pretty much any conceivable use where performance isn't super critical. I'm talking about cases like, say, you need to map keys to values but you don't really care about performance or which specific data structure you're using. That's stl's domain: robust, bullet-proof implementations of basic data structures that are good enough for most (or practically all) cases with the exception of a few very niche applications. If you happen to be one of the rare cases where you feel you need to know if a container is built around a red-black tree or any other fancy arcane data structure, and if this so critical to you that you feel the need to benchmark the performance to assess whether you either need to use non-defaults or completely replace parts or the whole container with a third-party alternative... Then and only then the stl is not for you. |
|
You're arguing it's better to use something that's across the board worse for nearly every user, and by a lot, just because... why? It's slightly more convenient?