Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » U++ Library support » U++ Core » NTL vs STL compatibility
NTL vs STL compatibility [message #11098] Sun, 19 August 2007 19:35 Go to next message
lectus is currently offline  lectus
Messages: 329
Registered: September 2006
Location: Brazil
Senior Member
Hi!
As a new C++ user (I was using C before), I bought Bjarne's book.
I'm studying containers.
How much NTL is different from STL?
Can I still use STL with Ultimate++? Are there any gains in doing that?
Will a STL code work with NTL by just renaming vector to Vector?

Thanks! Smile
Re: NTL vs STL compatibility [message #11099 is a reply to message #11098] Sun, 19 August 2007 21:04 Go to previous message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
lectus wrote on Sun, 19 August 2007 13:35

Hi!
As a new C++ user (I was using C before), I bought Bjarne's book.
I'm studying containers.
How much NTL is different from STL?



Quite a lot.

IMO STL design sacrifices performance and genericity in order to allow uniform processing.

U++ containers are more concerned about storing data...

Quote:


Can I still use STL with Ultimate++?



Yes, sure. You can even use STL algorithms on U++ containers (as long as elements satisfy STL requirements).

Quote:


Are there any gains in doing that?



Maybe if you need to interface with some existing/3rd party code using STL.

Also, it is always a good idea to learn STL principles.

Quote:


Will a STL code work with NTL by just renaming vector to Vector?



No.

Quote:


Thanks! Smile



You are welcome.

[Updated on: Sun, 19 August 2007 21:05]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: [bug] UPP doesn`t see B: virtual drive
Next Topic: Time and Date
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Mar 29 09:33:42 CET 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01210 seconds