Why Should I Avoid `std::vector` and When Might `std::deque` Be a Better Choice?

Understanding vector and Its Unique Characteristics

Scott Meyers's "Effective STL" highlights the avoidance of vector due to its divergence from standard STL containers. This peculiarity stems from vector's space optimization, storing each bool as a bit rather than a byte.

Breaking Down vector

Vector's unconventional behavior arises from its underlying implementation. Unlike traditional STL containers, vector returns a proxy object, not a bool&, when accessing elements using operator[]. This proxy allows for bit-level manipulation but lacks the ability to directly access memory addresses.

deque as an Alternative?

While Meyers endorses deque as a viable alternative to vector, it's crucial to note its potential drawbacks. Deque doesn't benefit from vector's memory efficiency, storing each bool as a full byte. Moreover, Microsoft's standard library implementation may allocate deque chunks in a way that compromises efficiency.

Summary

Vector's deviation from standard STL containers stems from its optimized memory usage. While it offers significant space savings, it does so at the cost of certain standard container capabilities and limitations in memory addressing. Deque provides a more conventional option, but its efficiency may vary depending on the implementation.

The above is the detailed content of Why Should I Avoid `std::vector` and When Might `std::deque` Be a Better Choice?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!