Comments on: Use STL lower_bound even though it’s slower http://www.sambal.org/2008-07/use-stl-lower_bound-even-though-its-slower/ Self-employment + software = fun, bitter Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:33:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Sam http://www.sambal.org/2008-07/use-stl-lower_bound-even-though-its-slower/#comment-79 Sam Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:14:59 +0000 http://www.sambal.org/?p=703#comment-79 A sensible question. A set might be the most appropriate data structure for some usage patterns, but it's not a drop-in equivalent. I expand into its own post here: http://www.sambal.org/2008-10/stl-lower_bound-set-vs-list/ A sensible question. A set might be the most appropriate data structure for some usage patterns, but it’s not a drop-in equivalent.

I expand into its own post here: http://www.sambal.org/2008-10/stl-lower_bound-set-vs-list/

]]> By: Paul http://www.sambal.org/2008-07/use-stl-lower_bound-even-though-its-slower/#comment-77 Paul Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:43:52 +0000 http://www.sambal.org/?p=703#comment-77 If you are going to use a list, and you want it sorted, and you want to look up things in it, then use std::set Thats what its designed to do... it can do a lower_bound quickly http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/stl/set/lower_bound.html and inserts/deletes are fast. if you have the option to use a set, why would you use a list ? If you are going to use a list, and you want it sorted, and you want to look up things in it, then use std::set

Thats what its designed to do… it can do a lower_bound quickly
http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/stl/set/lower_bound.html

and inserts/deletes are fast.

if you have the option to use a set, why would you use a list ?

]]>