gcc/libstdc++-v3/docs/23_containers/howto.html
Phil Edwards c0ed1dea37 docs: Update sourceware->sources in every HTML file.
2000-07-11  Phil Edwards  <pme@sourceware.cygnus.com>

	* docs:  Update sourceware->sources in every HTML file.  Minor updates.

From-SVN: r34967
2000-07-11 21:45:08 +00:00

247 lines
11 KiB
HTML

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="AUTHOR" CONTENT="pme@sources.redhat.com (Phil Edwards)">
<META NAME="KEYWORDS" CONTENT="HOWTO, libstdc++, egcs, g++, libg++, STL">
<META NAME="DESCRIPTION" CONTENT="HOWTO for the libstdc++ chapter 23.">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="vi and eight fingers">
<TITLE>libstdc++-v3 HOWTO: Chapter 23</TITLE>
<LINK REL="home" HREF="http://sources.redhat.com/libstdc++/docs/23_containers/">
<LINK REL=StyleSheet HREF="../lib3styles.css">
<!-- $Id: howto.html,v 1.1 2000/04/21 20:33:31 bkoz Exp $ -->
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<H1 CLASS="centered"><A NAME="top">Chapter 23: Containers</A></H1>
<P>Chapter 23 deals with container classes and what they offer.
</P>
<!-- ####################################################### -->
<HR>
<H1>Contents</H1>
<UL>
<LI><A HREF="#1">Making code unaware of the container/array difference</A>
<LI><A HREF="#2">Variable-sized bitmasks</A>
<LI><A HREF="#3">Containers and multithreading</A>
</UL>
<HR>
<!-- ####################################################### -->
<H2><A NAME="1">Making code unaware of the container/array difference</A></H2>
<P>You're writing some code and can't decide whether to use builtin
arrays or some kind of container. There are compelling reasons
to use one of the container classes, but you're afraid that you'll
eventually run into difficulties, change everything back to arrays,
and then have to change all the code that uses those data types to
keep up with the change.
</P>
<P>If your code makes use of the standard algorithms, this isn't as
scary as it sounds. The algorithms don't know, nor care, about
the kind of &quot;container&quot; on which they work, since the
algorithms are only given endpoints to work with. For the container
classes, these are iterators (usually <TT>begin()</TT> and
<TT>end()</TT>, but not always). For builtin arrays, these are
the address of the first element and the past-the-end element.
<!-- a good explanation of the past-the-end rules is in order,
probably a link somewhere
-->
</P>
<P>Some very simple wrapper functions can hide all of that from the
rest of the code. For example, a pair of functions called
<TT>beginof</TT> can be written, one that takes an array, another
that takes a vector. The first returns a pointer to the first
element, and the second returns the vector's <TT>begin()</TT>
iterator.
</P>
<P>The functions should be made template functions, and should also
be declared inline. As pointed out in the comments in the code
below, this can lead to <TT>beginof</TT> being optimized out of
existence, so you pay absolutely nothing in terms of increased
code size or execution time.
</P>
<P>The result is that if all your algorithm calls look like
<PRE>
std::transform(beginof(foo), endof(foo), beginof(foo), SomeFunction);</PRE>
then the type of foo can change from an array of ints to a vector
of ints to a deque of ints and back again, without ever changing any
client code.
</P>
<P>This author has a collection of such functions, called &quot;*of&quot;
because they all extend the builtin &quot;sizeof&quot;. It started
with some Usenet discussions on a transparent way to find the length
of an array. A simplified and much-reduced version for easier
reading is <A HREF="wrappers_h.txt">given here</A>.
</P>
<P>Astute readers will notice two things at once: first, that the
container class is still a <TT>vector&lt;T&gt;</TT> instead of a
more general <TT>Container&lt;T&gt;</TT>. This would mean that
three functions for <TT>deque</TT> would have to be added, another
three for <TT>list</TT>, and so on. This is due to problems with
getting template resolution correct; I find it easier just to
give the extra three lines and avoid confusion.
</P>
<P>Second, the line
<PRE>
inline unsigned int lengthof (T (&)[sz]) { return sz; } </PRE>
looks just weird! Hint: unused parameters can be left nameless.
</P>
<P>Return <A HREF="#top">to top of page</A> or
<A HREF="../faq/index.html">to the FAQ</A>.
</P>
<HR>
<H2><A NAME="2">Variable-sized bitmasks</A></H2>
<P>No, you cannot write code of the form
<!-- Careful, the leading spaces in PRE show up directly. -->
<PRE>
#include &lt;bitset&gt;
void foo (size_t n)
{
std::bitset&lt;n&gt; bits;
....
} </PRE>
because <TT>n</TT> must be known at compile time. Your compiler is
correct; it is not a bug. That's the way templates work. (Yes, it
<EM>is</EM> a feature.)
</P>
<P>There are a couple of ways to handle this kind of thing. Please
consider all of them before passing judgement. They include, in
no particular order:
<UL>
<LI>A very large N in <TT>bitset&lt;N&gt;</TT>.
<LI>A container&lt;bool&gt;.
<LI>Extremely weird solutions.
</UL>
</P>
<P><B>A very large N in <TT>bitset&lt;N&gt;</TT>.&nbsp;&nbsp;</B> It has
been pointed out a few times in newsgroups that N bits only takes up
(N/8) bytes on most systems, and division by a factor of eight is pretty
impressive when speaking of memory. Half a megabyte given over to a
bitset (recall that there is zero space overhead for housekeeping info;
it is known at compile time exactly how large the set is) will hold over
four million bits. If you're using those bits as status flags (e.g.,
&quot;changed&quot;/&quot;unchanged&quot; flags), that's a <EM>lot</EM>
of state.
</P>
<P>You can then keep track of the &quot;maximum bit used&quot; during some
testing runs on representative data, make note of how many of those bits
really need to be there, and then reduce N to a smaller number. Leave
some extra space, of course. (If you plan to write code like the
incorrect example above, where the bitset is a local variable, then you
may have to talk your compiler into allowing that much stack space;
there may be zero spae overhead, but it's all allocated inside the
object.)
</P>
<P><B>A container&lt;bool&gt;.&nbsp;&nbsp;</B> The Committee made provision
for the space savings possible with that (N/8) usage previously mentioned,
so that you don't have to do wasteful things like
<TT>Container&lt;char&gt;</TT> or <TT>Container&lt;short int&gt;</TT>.
Specifically, <TT>vector&lt;bool&gt;</TT> is required to be
specialized for that space savings.
</P>
<P>The problem is that <TT>vector&lt;bool&gt;</TT> doesn't behave like a
normal vector anymore. There have been recent journal articles which
discuss the problems (the ones by Herb Sutter in the May and
July/August 1999 issues of
<EM>C++ Report</EM> cover it well). Future revisions of the ISO C++
Standard will change the requirement for <TT>vector&lt;bool&gt;</TT>
specialization. In the meantime, <TT>deque&lt;bool&gt;</TT> is
recommended (although its behavior is sane, you probably will not get
the space savings, but the allocation scheme is different than that
of vector).
</P>
<P><B>Extremely weird solutions.&nbsp;&nbsp;</B> If you have access to
the compiler and linker at runtime, you can do something insane, like
figuring out just how many bits you need, then writing a temporary
source code file. That file contains an instantiation of <TT>bitset</TT>
for the required number of bits, inside some wrapper functions with
unchanging signatures. Have your program then call the
compiler on that file using Position Independant Code, then open the
newly-created object file and load those wrapper functions. You'll have
an instantiation of <TT>bitset&lt;N&gt;</TT> for the exact <TT>N</TT>
that you need at the time. Don't forget to delete the temporary files.
(Yes, this <EM>can</EM> be, and <EM>has been</EM>, done.)
</P>
<!-- I wonder if this next paragraph will get me in trouble... -->
<P>This would be the approach of either a visionary genius or a raving
lunatic, depending on your programming and management style. Probably
the latter.
</P>
<P>Which of the above techniques you use, if any, are up to you and your
intended application. Some time/space profiling is indicated if it
really matters (don't just guess). And, if you manage to do anything
along the lines of the third category, the author would love to hear
from you...
</P>
<P>Return <A HREF="#top">to top of page</A> or
<A HREF="../faq/index.html">to the FAQ</A>.
</P>
<HR>
<H2><A NAME="3">Containers and multithreading</A></H2>
<P>This section will mention some of the problems in designing MT
programs that use Standard containers. For information on other
aspects of multithreading (e.g., the library as a whole), see
the Received Wisdom on Chapter 17.
</P>
<P>An excellent page to read when working with templatized containers
and threads is
<A HREF="http://www.sgi.com/Technology/STL/thread_safety.html">SGI's
http://www.sgi.com/Technology/STL/thread_safety.html</A>. The
libstdc++-v3 uses the same definition of thread safety
when discussing design. A key point that beginners may miss is the
fourth major paragraph (&quot;For most clients,&quot;...), pointing
out that locking must nearly always be done outside the container,
by client code (that'd be you, not us *grin*).
</P>
<P>You didn't read it, did you? *sigh* I'm serious, go read the
SGI page. It's really good and doesn't take long, and makes most
of the points that would otherwise have to be made here (and does
a better job).
</P>
<P>That's much better. Now, the issue of MT has been brought up on
the libstdc++-v3 mailing list as well as the main GCC mailing list
several times. The Chapter 17 HOWTO has some links into the mail
archives, so you can see what's been thrown around. The usual
container (or pseudo-container, depending on how you look at it)
that people have in mind is <TT>string</TT>, which is one of the
points where libstdc++ departs from the SGI STL. As of the
2.90.8 snapshot, the libstdc++-v3 string class is safe for
certain kinds of multithreaded access.
</P>
<P>For implementing a container which does its own locking, it is
trivial to (as SGI suggests) provide a wrapper class which obtains
the lock, performs the container operation, then releases the lock.
This could be templatized <EM>to a certain extent</EM>, on the
underlying container and/or a locking mechanism. Trying to provide
a catch-all general template solution would probably be more trouble
than it's worth.
</P>
<P>Return <A HREF="#top">to top of page</A> or
<A HREF="../faq/index.html">to the FAQ</A>.
</P>
<!-- ####################################################### -->
<HR>
<P CLASS="fineprint"><EM>
Comments and suggestions are welcome, and may be sent to
<A HREF="mailto:pme@sources.redhat.com">Phil Edwards</A> or
<A HREF="mailto:gdr@egcs.cygnus.com">Gabriel Dos Reis</A>.
<BR> $Id: howto.html,v 1.1 2000/04/21 20:33:31 bkoz Exp $
</EM></P>
</BODY>
</HTML>