Shaun Jackman <
sjackman@...> writes:
> unordered_set::erase returns an iterator to the next element in the hash
> table. When the hash table is empty, this means checking every single
> bucket. For a hash table that used to have a lot of elements (say one
> million) which were all removed and now has only a few elements (say
> two), erasing an element is very slow. I'm not using the iterator
> returned by erase. Is there a way to avoid this situation? I'm not very
> keen on checking the load_factor and resizing the number buckets.
I think you have described the situation accurately. It would be easy
for libstdc++ to expose a variant of erase which does not return an
iterator (it's already there, but it's a private method), but that
would be a non-standard extension to the standardized class. I
recommend that you file an enhancement request at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ to see what the libstdc++ maintainers
think. Or you could try asking on the
libstdc++@... mailing
list.
Ian
