Re: [Monotone-devel] using empty() instead of size()

[Zack Weinberg]

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Markus Wanner <address@hidden> wrote:
> This leads me to think that the STL implementation doesn't provide an O(1)
> implementation for size()... savings is avg memory consumption seems to
> confirm this, no?

Now that's just bloody weird.  I can't think of any reason size()
would need to *allocate memory*.

Please do carry on with the empty() conversions; I may be doing the
grumpy old man thing about crummy STL implementations, but those are
nonetheless what we have to live with.

zw