I have been using C++11's forward_list
as a container for fast insertions, without much memory overhead, since it is a singly linked list.
After realizing that forward_list
does not have a size()
method, I'm a bit confused about the reasoning behind that. Couldn't it just maintain a private field keeping track of nodes inserted and removed, hence, implementing an O(1) size() operation?
To get the size of forward lists, one can use std::distance() function. Approach: Since std::distance() function takes two iterators as arguments and it returns an integer, the std::begin() and std::end() function can be passed which points to the address of the first item and the address just after the last item.
std::forward_list is a container that supports fast insertion and removal of elements from anywhere in the container. Fast random access is not supported. It is implemented as a singly-linked list. Compared to std::list this container provides more space efficient storage when bidirectional iteration is not needed.
Forward lists are sequence containers that allow constant time insert and erase operations anywhere within the sequence. Forward lists are implemented as singly-linked lists; Singly linked lists can store each of the elements they contain in different and unrelated storage locations.
C++ empty() function is used to check if the forward list container is empty or not.
N2543 is the proposal, and it has a detailed discussion about size()
.
The choice between Option 3 [not providing
size()
] and Option 2 [providing a O(1)size()
] is more a matter of judgment. I have chosen Option 3 for the same reason that I chose insert-after instead of insert-before: Option 3 is more consistent with the goal of zero overhead compared to a hand-written C-style linked list. Maintaining a count doubles the size of aforward_list
object (one word for the list head and one for the count), and it slows down every operation that changes the number of nodes. In most cases this isn't a change in asymptotic complexity (the one change in asymptotic complexity is in one of the forms ofsplice
), but it is nonzero overhead. It's a cost that all users would have to pay for, whether they need this feature or not, and, for users who care about maintaining a count, it's just as easy to maintain it outside the list, by incrementing the count with every insert and decrementing it with every erase, as it is to maintain the count within the list.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With