[fpc-pascal] Re: State of fcl-stl generics lib
Marco van de Voort
marcov at stack.nl
Sun Jan 20 22:43:47 CET 2013
In our previous episode, Florian Kl?mpfl said:
> >>> Indeed, but the additions should follow a common goal and as far as I
> >>> understood, fcl-stl shall provide opaque containers which is not the
> >>> case for a tree implementation.
> >> ? Why not ? I see no difference with a list or collection ?
> > I didn't get the problem either.
> > I do see another redudancy. gset already has a red-black implementation.
> > (even if it is called a set)
> Yes, STL is about usage patterns (like any good container library) but
> not about implementation.
I learned my containers with Java, rather than STL. But your argumentation
sounds more like the fixation of interfaces rather than real classes (which
always have an implementation, and thus have properties like O(log n) ness,
in order walking etc, something that e.g. the principal pattern SET doesn't convey).
More information about the fpc-pascal