Since this question draws so many votes and kind of becomes an FAQ, I guess it would be better to write a separate answer to mention one significant difference between C++03 and C++11 regarding the impact of std::vector
's insertion operation on the validity of iterators and references with respect to reserve()
and capacity()
, which the most upvoted answer failed to notice.
C++ 03:
Reallocation invalidates all the references, pointers, and iterators
referring to the elements in the sequence. It is guaranteed that no
reallocation takes place during insertions that happen after a call to
reserve() until the time when an insertion would make the size of the
vector greater than the size specified in the most recent call to
reserve().
C++11:
Reallocation invalidates all the references, pointers, and iterators
referring to the elements in the sequence. It is guaranteed that no
reallocation takes place during insertions that happen after a call to
reserve() until the time when an insertion would make the size of the
vector greater than the value of capacity().
So in C++03, it is not "unless the new container size is greater than the previous capacity (in which case all iterators and references are invalidated)
" as mentioned in the other answer, instead, it should be "greater than the size specified in the most recent call to reserve()
". This is one thing that C++03 differs from C++11. In C++03, once an insert()
causes the size of the vector to reach the value specified in the previous reserve()
call (which could well be smaller than the current capacity()
since a reserve()
could result a bigger capacity()
than asked for), any subsequent insert()
could cause reallocation and invalidate all the iterators and references. In C++11, this won't happen and you can always trust capacity()
to know with certainty that the next reallocation won't take place before the size overpasses capacity()
.
In conclusion, if you are working with a C++03 vector and you want to make sure a reallocation won't happen when you perform insertion, it's the value of the argument you previously passed to reserve()
that you should check the size against, not the return value of a call to capacity()
, otherwise you may get yourself surprised at a "premature" reallocation.
No comments:
Post a Comment