undefined | Better HN

0 pointsNegitivefrags13y ago0 comments

Bjarne Stroustrop showed in a presentation a while back that std::list never becomes more optimal than std::vector regardless of size.

Edit: Sorry, I read your comment incorrectly. Instead of std::set I would use a sorted vector without thought for anything up a thousand elements or so. After that it's probably worth profiling. Vector is probably still good even quite a good way after that depending on your use case.

0 comments

quotemstr13y ago

> Bjarne Stroustrop showed in a presentation a while back that std::list never becomes more optimal than std::vector regardless of size.

Until memory fragments and you can't allocate a contiguous block for a big vector.

jasonwatkinspdx13y ago

64bit memory spaces are pretty hard to fragment to that degree, but it could be a concern on smaller embedded systems still.

anonymous13y ago

If memory serves me right, even on 64bit, the standard malloc won't allow you to grab a chunk larger than about 2G. You can still have as many chunks as you like, but you can't have a single chunk larger than that. Of course, you can always use a different memory manager.

1 more reply

exDM6913y ago

It's the physical memory that fragments, not the virtual address space. So it's about the amount of physical memory available, not address sizes.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsNegitivefrags13y ago0 comments

Bjarne Stroustrop showed in a presentation a while back that std::list never becomes more optimal than std::vector regardless of size.

0 comments

quotemstr13y ago

> Bjarne Stroustrop showed in a presentation a while back that std::list never becomes more optimal than std::vector regardless of size.

Until memory fragments and you can't allocate a contiguous block for a big vector.

jasonwatkinspdx13y ago

64bit memory spaces are pretty hard to fragment to that degree, but it could be a concern on smaller embedded systems still.

anonymous13y ago

1 more reply

exDM6913y ago

It's the physical memory that fragments, not the virtual address space. So it's about the amount of physical memory available, not address sizes.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse