Re: Modified version of l_dispatcher.h -- please try it.

al davis wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 March 2007 11:47, Scott Dattalo wrote:
>   
>> You can achieve static allocation and control the order which
>> objects are allocated.
>>     
>
> There is no way that is absolutely consistent and portable.  
> That is the issue.  
>   

Maybe I'm missing something, but in gpsim I have statically allocated 
objects, C++, dynamically loadable modules, and support Linux, Windows, 
BSD and (at one point) Solaris. However, I typically don't statically 
link everything.

>> In gpsim (the gnupic simulator for Microchip PIC
>> microcontrollers) I just switched over the implementation of
>> the symbol tables from STL list containers to STL map
>> containers. I don't use map's size method, however I never
>> add null objects to the symbol table either. Why would a
>> failed map lookup end adding a null object to the map?
>>     
>
> Do you ever use operator[] to index your map?  It returns an 
> lvalue, which adds a default object for a failed lookup.  It 
> doesn't hurt anything.
>   

Thanks for pointing this out. Yes I do use operator[], but I think I use 
it in a way in which a default object is not created. For example, 
instead of using operator[] to index into the map to search for a 
particular key, I use the find() method. This returns an iterator pair 
that can be compared against end(). I'm assuming find() does not create 
a superfluous default object in the map. When adding to the map, I do 
use operator[].

Scott