STL vector vs list: Most efficient for graph adjacency lists?

Question

Lists consume most of their time in allocating memory when pushing_back. On the other hand, vectors have to copy their elements when a resize is needed. Which container is, therefore, the most efficient for storing an adjacency list?

Answer 1

I don't think this can be answered with absolute certainty. Nonetheless, I'd estimate that there's at least a 90% chance that a vector will do better. An adjacency list actually tends to favor a vector more than many applications, because the order of elements in the adjacency list doesn't normally matter. This means when you add elements, it's normally to the end of the container, and when you delete an element, you can swap it to the end of the container first, so you only ever add or delete at the end.

Yes, a vector has to copy or move elements when it expands, but in reality this is almost never a substantial concern. In particular, the exponential expansion rate of a vector means that the average number of times elements get copied/moved tends toward a constant -- and in a typical implementation, that constant is about 3.

If you're in a situation where the copying honestly is a real problem (e.g., copying elements is extremely expensive), my next choice after vector still wouldn't be list. Instead, I'd probably consider using std::deque instead¹. It's basically a vector of pointers to blocks of objects. It rarely has to copy anything to do an expansion, and on the rare occasion that it does, all it has to copy is the pointers, not the objects. Unless you need the other unique capabilities of a deque (insert/delete in constant time at either end), a vector is usually a better choice, but even so a deque is almost always a better choice than a list (i.e., vector is generally the first choice, deque a fairly close second, and list quite a distant last).

---

^{1. One minor aside though: at least in the past, Microsoft's implementation of `std::deque` had what I'd consider sort of a defect. If the size of an element in the `deque` is greater than 16, it ends up storing pointers to "blocks" of only a single element apiece, which tends to negate much of the advantage of using `deque` in the first place. This generally won't have much effect on its use for an adjacency list though.}