You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi Mark! My memory of some design decisions is a bit rusty (I wrote this 10 years ago) but IIRC this is a consequence of some assymetries from trying to support a tree<> that could be either empty or have one root element. In more modern FP parlance it's really the analog of something like scala Option[T] acting like a sequence that is either empty or has one element.
It's slightly hinky under the hood, but I think it might be well defined to have tree<> return begin/end in either the empty or non empty case.
However, I'm going to leave this open in the event that either I have the bandwidth to work on it, or someone else wants to contribute an implementation.
I am thinking about using st_tree on a new project, and have been doing some preliminary testing.
I have one question about obtaining a pointer to the root node to help me construct a tree using node_type iterators.
In an earlier issue, you commented that you could get a node_type iterator from the tree by doing:
Upon execution, I get an empty tree exception. This makes sense as the insert is done after the root() is dereferenced.
I can make it work by inserting a placeholder as follows:
But then we have an extra ply that really isn't part of the tree.
Is there another way to insert a root node in a tree, and then to get an node_type iterator for that node?
Thanks,
Mark
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: