[/
 / Copyright (c) 2009-2011 Ion Gazta\u00F1aga
 /
 / Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying
 / file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
 /]

[library Boost.Container
    [quickbook 1.5]
    [authors [Gaztanaga, Ion]]
    [copyright 2009-2011 Ion Gaztanaga]
    [id container]
    [dirname container]
    [purpose Containers library]
    [license
        Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
        (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at
        [@http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt])
    ]
]

[template super[x]'''<superscript>'''[x]'''</superscript>''']
[template sub[x]'''<subscript>'''[x]'''</subscript>''']

[section:intro Introduction]

[*Boost.Container] library implements several well-known containers, including
STL containers. The aim of the library is to offers advanced features not present
in standard containers or to offer the latest standard draft features for compilers
that comply with C++03.

In short, what does [*Boost.Container] offer?

* Move semantics are implemented, including move emulation for pre-C++11 compilers.
* New advanced features (e.g. placement insertion, recursive containers) are present.
* Containers support stateful allocators and are compatible with [*Boost.Interprocess]
  (they can be safely placed in shared memory).
* The library offers new useful containers:
  * [classref boost::container::flat_map flat_map],
    [classref boost::container::flat_map flat_set],
    [classref boost::container::flat_map flat_multiset] and
    [classref boost::container::flat_map flat_multiset]: drop-in
    replacements for standard associative containers but more memory friendly and with faster
    searches.
  * [classref boost::container::stable_vector stable_vector]: a std::list and std::vector hybrid
    container: vector-like random-access iterators and list-like iterator stability in insertions and erasures.
  * [classref boost::container::slist slist]: the classic pre-standard singly linked list implementation
    offering constant-time `size()`. Note that C++11 `forward_list` has no `size()`.

[section:introduction_building_container Building Boost.Container]

There is no need to compile [*Boost.Container], since it's
a header only library. Just include your Boost header directory in your
compiler include path.

[endsect]

[section:tested_compilers Tested compilers]

[*Boost.Container] requires a decent C++98 compatibility. Some compilers known to work are:

*  Visual C++ >= 7.1.
*  GCC >= 4.1.
*  Intel C++ >= 9.0

[endsect]

[endsect]

[section:move_emplace Efficient insertion]

Move semantics and placement insertion are two features brought by C++11 containers
that can have a very positive impact in your C++ applications. Boost.Container implements
both techniques both for C++11 and C++03 compilers.

[section:move_containers Move-aware containers]

All containers offered by [*Boost.Container] can store movable-only types
and actual requirements for `value_type` depend on each container operations.
Following C++11 requirements even for C++03 compilers, many operations now require
movable or default constructible types instead of just copy constructible types.

Containers themselves are also movable, with no-throw guarantee if allocator
or predicate (if present) copy operations are no-throw. This allows
high performance operations when transferring data between vectors.
Let's see an example:

[import ../example/doc_move_containers.cpp]
[doc_move_containers]

[endsect]

[section:emplace Emplace: Placement insertion]

All containers offered by [*Boost.Container] implement placement insertion,
which means that  objects can be built directly into the container from user arguments
without creating any temporary object. For compilers without variadic templates support
placement insertion is emulated up to a finite (10) number of arguments.

Expensive to move types are perfect candidates emplace functions and in case of node containers
([classref boost::container::list list], [classref boost::container::set set], ...)
emplace allows storing non-movable and non-copyable types in containers! Let's
see an example:

[import ../example/doc_emplace.cpp]
[doc_emplace]

[endsect]

[endsect]


[section:containers_of_incomplete_types Containers of Incomplete Types]

Incomplete types allow
[@http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_erasure [*type erasure ]] and
[@http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursive_data_type [*recursive data types]], and
C and C++ programmers have been using it for years to build complex data structures, like
tree structures where a node may have an arbitrary number of children.

What about standard containers? Containers of incomplete types have been under discussion for a long time,
as explained in Matt Austern's great article ([@http://drdobbs.com/184403814 [*The Standard Librarian: Containers of Incomplete Types]]):

["['Unlike most of my columns, this one is about something you can't do with the C++ Standard library:
put incomplete types in one of the standard containers. This column explains why you might want to
do this, why the standardization committee banned it even though they knew it was useful, and what
you might be able to do to get around the restriction.]]

["['In 1997, shortly before the C++ Standard was completed, the standardization committee received a
query: Is it possible to create standard containers with incomplete types? It took a while for the
committee to understand the question. What would such a thing even mean, and why on earth would you
ever want to do it? The committee eventually worked it out and came up with an answer to the question.
(Just so you don't have to skip ahead to the end, the answer is "no.") But the question is much more
interesting than the answer: it points to a useful, and insufficiently discussed, programming technique.
The standard library doesn't directly support that technique, but the two can be made to coexist.]]

["['In a future revision of C++, it might make sense to relax the restriction on instantiating
standard library templates with incomplete types. Clearly, the general prohibition should stay
in place - instantiating templates with incomplete types is a delicate business, and there are
too many classes in the standard library where it would make no sense. But perhaps it should be
relaxed on a case-by-case basis, and `vector` looks like a good candidate for such special-case
treatment: it's the one standard container class where there are good reasons to instantiate
it with an incomplete type and where Standard Library implementors want to make it work. As of
today, in fact, implementors would have to go out of their way to prohibit it!]]

C++11 standard is also cautious about incomplete types and STL: ["['17.6.4.8 Other functions (...) 2.
the effects are undefined in the following cases: (...) In particular - if an incomplete type (3.9)
is used as a template argument when instantiating a template component,
unless specifically allowed for that component]]. Fortunately [*Boost.Container] containers are designed
to support type erasure and recursive types, so let's see some examples:

[section:recursive_containers Recursive containers]

All containers offered by [*Boost.Container] can be used to define recursive containers:

[import ../example/doc_recursive_containers.cpp]
[doc_recursive_containers]

[endsect]

[section:type_erasure Type Erasure]

Containers of incomplete types are useful to break header file dependencies and improve
compilation types. With Boost.Container, you can write a header file defining a class
with containers of incomplete types as data members, if you carefully put all the
implementation details that require knowing the size of the `value_type` in your
implementation file:

[import ../example/doc_type_erasure.cpp]

In this header file we define a class (`MyClassHolder)` that holds a `vector` of an
incomplete type (`MyClass`) that it's only forward declared.

[doc_type_erasure_MyClassHolder_h]

Then we can define `MyClass` in its own header file.

[doc_type_erasure_MyClass_h]

And include it only in the implementation file of `MyClassHolder`

[doc_type_erasure_MyClassHolder_cpp]

Finally, we can just compile, link, and run!

[doc_type_erasure_main_cpp]

[endsect]

[endsect]

[section:non_standard_containers Non-standard containers]

[section:stable_vector ['stable_vector]]

This useful, fully STL-compliant stable container [@http://bannalia.blogspot.com/2008/09/introducing-stablevector.html designed by by Joaqu\u00EDn M. L\u00F3pez Mu\u00F1oz]
is an hybrid between `vector` and `list`, providing most of
the features of `vector` except [@http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#69 element contiguity].

Extremely convenient as they are, `vector`s have a limitation that many novice C++ programmers frequently stumble upon:
iterators and references to an element of an `vector` are invalidated when a preceding element is erased or when the
vector expands and needs to migrate its internal storage to a wider memory region (i.e. when the required size exceeds
the vector's capacity). We say then that `vector`s are unstable: by contrast, stable containers are those for which
references and iterators to a given element remain valid as long as the element is not erased: examples of stable containers
within the C++ standard library are `list` and the standard associative containers (`set`, `map`, etc.).

Sometimes stability is too precious a feature to live without, but one particular property of `vector`s, element contiguity,
makes it impossible to add stability to this container. So, provided we sacrifice element contiguity, how much
can a stable design approach the behavior of `vector` (random access iterators, amortized constant time end
insertion/deletion, minimal memory overhead, etc.)?
The following image describes the layout of a possible data structure upon which to base the design of a stable vector:

[$images/stable_vector.png [width 50%] [align center] ]

Each element is stored in its own separate node. All the nodes are referenced from a contiguous array of pointers, but
also every node contains an "up" pointer referring back to the associated array cell. This up pointer is the key element
to implementing stability and random accessibility:

Iterators point to the nodes rather than to the pointer array. This ensures stability, as it is only the pointer array
that needs to be shifted or relocated upon insertion or deletion. Random access operations can be implemented by using
the pointer array as a convenient intermediate zone. For instance, if the iterator it holds a node pointer `it.p` and we
want to advance it by n positions, we simply do:

[c++]

   it.p = *(it.p->up+n);

That is, we go "up" to the pointer array, add n there and then go "down" to the resulting node. 

[*General properties]. `stable_vector` satisfies all the requirements of a container, a reversible container and a sequence
and provides all the optional operations present in vector. Like vector, iterators are random access. `stable_vector`
does not provide element contiguity; in exchange for this absence, the container is stable, i.e. references and iterators
to an element of a `stable_vector` remain valid as long as the element is not erased, and an iterator that has been
assigned the return value of end() always remain valid until the destruction of the associated `stable_vector`.

[*Operation complexity]. The big-O complexities of `stable_vector` operations match exactly those of vector. In general,
insertion/deletion is constant time at the end of the sequence and linear elsewhere. Unlike vector, `stable_vector`
does not internally perform any value_type destruction, copy/move construction/assignment operations other than those exactly
corresponding to the insertion of new elements or deletion of stored elements, which can sometimes compensate in terms of
performance for the extra burden of doing more pointer manipulation and an additional allocation per element.

[*Exception safety]. (according to [@http://www.boost.org/community/exception_safety.html Abrahams' terminology])
As `stable_vector` does not internally copy/move elements around, some
operations provide stronger exception safety guarantees than in vector:

[table:stable_vector_req Exception safety
    [[operation] [exception safety for `vector<T>`] [exception safety for `stable_vector<T>`]]
    [[insert]    [strong unless copy/move construction/assignment of `T` throw (basic)]     [strong]]
    [[erase]     [no-throw unless copy/move construction/assignment  of `T` throw (basic)]     [no-throw]]
]

[*Memory overhead]. The C++ standard does not specifiy requirements on memory consumption, but virtually any implementation
of `vector` has the same behavior wih respect to memory usage: the memory allocated by a `vector` v with n elements of type T
is

m[sub v] = c\u2219e,

where c is `v.capacity()` and e is `sizeof(T)`. c can be as low as n if the user has explicitly reserved the exact capacity
required; otherwise, the average value c for a growing `vector` oscillates between 1.25\u2219n and 1.5\u2219n for typical resizing
policies. For `stable_vector`, the memory usage is

m[sub sv] = (c + 1)p + (n + 1)(e + p),

where p is the size of a pointer. We have c + 1 and n + 1 rather than c and n because a dummy node is needed at the end of
the sequence. If we call f the capacity to size ratio c/n and assume that n is large enough, we have that

m[sub sv]/m[sub v] \u2243 (fp + e + p)/fe.

So, `stable_vector` uses less memory than `vector` only when e > p and the capacity to size ratio exceeds a given threshold:

m[sub sv] < m[sub v] <-> f > (e + p)/(e - p). (provided e > p)

This threshold approaches typical values of f below 1.5 when e > 5p; in a 32-bit architecture, when e > 20 bytes.

[*Summary]. `stable_vector` is a drop-in replacement for `vector` providing stability of references and iterators, in exchange
for missing element contiguity and also some performance and memory overhead. When the element objects are expensive to
move around, the performance overhead can turn into a net performance gain for `stable_vector` if many middle insertions
or deletions are performed or if resizing is very frequent. Similarly, if the elements are large there are situations when
the memory used by `stable_vector` can actually be less than required by vector.

['Note: Text and explanations taken from [@http://bannalia.blogspot.com/2008/09/introducing-stablevector.html Joaqu\u00EDn's blog]]

[endsect]

[section:flat_xxx ['flat_(multi)map/set] associative containers]

Using sorted vectors instead of tree-based associative containers is a well-known technique in
C++ world. Matt Austern's  classic article
[@http://lafstern.org/matt/col1.pdf Why You Shouldn't Use set, and What You Should Use Instead]
(C++ Report 12:4, April 2000) was enlightening:

["['Red-black trees aren't the only way to organize data that permits lookup in logarithmic time.  One of the basic
algorithms of computer science is binary search, which works by successively dividing a range in half. Binary
search is log N and it doesn't require any fancy data structures, just a sorted collection of elements. 
(...) You can use whatever data structure is convenient, so long as it provides STL iterator; 
usually it's easiest to use a C array, or a vector.]]

["['Both std::lower_bound and set::find take time proportional to log N, but the constants of proportionality
are very different.  Using g++ (...) it takes X seconds to perform a million lookups in a
sorted vector<double> of a million elements, and almost twice as long (...) using a set. Moreover,
the set uses almost three times as much memory (48 million bytes) as the vector (16.8 million).]]

["['Using a sorted vector instead of a set gives you faster lookup and much faster iteration,
but at the cost of slower insertion.  Insertion into a set, using set::insert, is proportional
to log N, but insertion into a sorted vector, (...)
, is proportional to N. Whenever you insert something into a vector,
vector::insert has to make room by shifting all of the elements that follow it.  On average, if you're equally
likely to insert a new element anywhere, you'll be shifting N/2 elements.]]

["['It may sometimes be convenient to bundle all of this together into a small container adaptor.
This class does not satisfy the requirements of a Standard Associative Container, since the complexity of insert is
O(N) rather than O(log N), but otherwise it is almost a drop-in replacement for set.]]

Following Matt Austern's indications, Andrei Alexandrescu's
[@http://www.bestwebbuys.com/Modern-C-Design-Generic-Programming-and-Design-Patterns-Applied-ISBN-9780201704310?isrc=-rd Modern C++ Design]
showed `AssocVector`, a `std::map` drop-in
replacement designed in his [@http://loki-lib.sourceforge.net/ Loki] library:

["['It seems as if we're better off with a sorted vector. The disadvantages of a sorted
vector are linear-time insertions and linear-time deletions (...). In exchange, a vector 
offers about twice the lookup speed and a much smaller working set (...). 
Loki saves the trouble of maintaining a sorted vector by hand by defining an AssocVector class 
template. AssocVector is a drop-in replacement for std::map (it supports the same set of member 
functions), implemented on top of std::vector. AssocVector differs from a map in the behavior of 
its erase functions (AssocVector::erase invalidates all iterators into the object) and in the 
complexity guarantees of insert and erase (linear as opposed to constant). ]]

[*Boost.Container] `flat_[multi]map/set` containers are ordered-vector based associative containers
based on Austern's and Alexandrescu's guidelines. These ordered vector containers have also
benefited recently with the addition of `move semantics` to C++, speeding up insertion
and erasure times considerably. Flat associative containers have the following
attributes:

* Faster lookup than standard associative containers
* Much faster iteration than standard associative containers
* Less memory consumption for small objects (and for big objects if `shrink_to_fit` is used)
* Improved cache performance (data is stored in contiguous memory)
* Non-stable iterators (iterators are invalidated when inserting and erasing elements)
* Non-copyable and non-movable values types can't be stored
* Weaker exception safety than standard associative containers
(copy/move constructors can throw when shifting values in erasures and insertions)
* Slower insertion and erasure than standard associative containers (specially for non-movable types)

[endsect]

[section:slist ['slist]]

When the standard template library was designed, it contained a singly linked list called `slist`.
Unfortunately, this container was not standardized and remained as an extension for many standard
library implementations until C++11 introduced `forward_list`, which is a bit different from the
the original SGI `slist`. According to [@http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/Slist.html SGI STL documentation]:

["['An `slist` is a singly linked list: a list where each element is linked to the next element, but
not to the previous element. That is, it is a Sequence that supports forward but not backward traversal,
and (amortized) constant time insertion and removal of elements. Slists, like lists, have the important
property that insertion and splicing do not invalidate iterators to list elements, and that even removal
invalidates only the iterators that point to the elements that are removed. The ordering of iterators
may be changed (that is, slist<T>::iterator might have a different predecessor or successor after a list
operation than it did before), but the iterators themselves will not be invalidated or made to point to
different elements unless that invalidation or mutation is explicit.]]

["['The main difference between `slist` and list is that list's iterators are bidirectional iterators,
while slist's iterators are forward iterators. This means that `slist` is less versatile than list;
frequently, however, bidirectional iterators are unnecessary. You should usually use `slist` unless
you actually need the extra functionality of list, because singly linked lists are smaller and faster
than double linked lists.]]

["['Important performance note: like every other Sequence, `slist` defines the member functions insert and erase.
Using these member functions carelessly, however, can result in disastrously slow programs. The problem is that
insert's first argument is an iterator pos, and that it inserts the new element(s) before pos. This means that
insert must find the iterator just before pos; this is a constant-time operation for list, since list has
bidirectional iterators, but for `slist` it must find that iterator by traversing the list from the beginning
up to pos. In other words: insert and erase are slow operations anywhere but near the beginning of the slist.]]

["['Slist provides the member functions insert_after and erase_after, which are constant time operations: you should
always use insert_after and erase_after whenever possible. If you find that insert_after and erase_after aren't
adequate for your needs, and that you often need to use insert and erase in the middle of the list, then you
should probably use list instead of slist.]]

[*Boost.Container] updates the classic `slist` container with C++11 features like move semantics and placement
insertion and implements it a bit differently for the standard C++11 `forward_list`. `forward_list` has no `size()`
method, so it's been designed to allow (or in practice, encourage) implementations without tracking list size
with every insertion/erasure, allowing constant-time 
`splice_after(iterator, forward_list &, iterator, iterator)`-based list merging. On the other hand `slist` offers
constant-time `size()` for those that don't care about linear-time `splice_after(iterator, slist &, iterator, iterator)`
`size()` and offers an additional `splice_after(iterator, slist &, iterator, iterator, size_type)` method that
can speed up `slist` merging when the programmer already knows the size. `slist` and `forward_list` are therefore
complementary.

[endsect]

[endsect]

[section:Cpp11_conformance C++11 Conformance]

[*Boost.Container] aims for full C++11 conformance except reasoned deviations,
backporting as much as possible for C++03. Obviously, this conformance is a work
in progress so this section explains what C++11 features are implemented and which of them
have been backported to C++03 compilers.

[section:move_emplace Move and Emplace]

For compilers with rvalue references and for those C++03 types that use
[@http://www.boost.org/libs/move Boost.Move] rvalue reference emulation
[*Boost.Container] supports all C++11 features related to move semantics: containers
are movable, requirements for `value_type` are those specified for C++11 containers.

For compilers with variadic templates, [*Boost.Container] supports placement insertion
(`emplace`, ...) functions from C++11. For those compilers without variadic templates
support [*Boost.Container] uses the preprocessor to create a set of overloads up to
a finite (10) number of parameters.

[endsect]

[section:alloc_traits_move_traits Stateful allocators]

C++03 was not stateful-allocator friendly. For compactness of container objects and for
simplicity, it did not require containers to support allocators with state: Allocator objects
need not be stored in container objects. It was not possible to store an allocator with state,
say an allocator that holds a pointer to an arena from which to allocate. C++03 allowed implementors
to suppose two allocators of the same type always compare equal (that means that memory allocated
by one allocator object could be deallocated by another instance of the same type) and
allocators were not swapped when the container was swapped.

C++11 further improves stateful allocator support through the
[@http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2554.pdf
Scoped Allocators model]. [@http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/allocator_traits
`std::allocator_traits`] is the protocol between a container and an allocator, and
an allocator writer can customize its behaviour (should the container propagate it in
move constructor, swap, etc.?) following `allocator_traits` requirements. [*Boost.Container]
not only supports this model with C++11 but also [*backports it to C++03]. 

If possible, a single allocator is hold to construct `value_type`. If the container needs an auxiliary 
allocator (e.g. a array allocator used by `deque` or `stable_vector`), that allocator is also 
constructed from the user-supplied allocator when the container is constructed (i.e. it's 
not constructed on the fly when auxiliary memory is needed).

[endsect]

[section:initializer_lists Initializer lists]

[*Boost.Container] does not support initializer lists when constructing or assigning containers
but it will support it for compilers with initialized-list support. This feature won't be backported
to C++03 compilers.

[endsect]

[section:forward_list `forward_list<T>`]

[*Boost.Container] does not offer C++11 `forward_list` container yet, but it will be available in future
versions.

[endsect]

[section:Vector_bool `vector<bool>`]

`vector<bool>` specialization has been quite problematic, and there have been several
unsuccessful tries to deprecate or remove it from the standard. [*Boost.Container] does not implement it
as there is a superior [@http://www.boost.org/libs/dynamic_bitset/ Boost.DynamicBitset]
solution. For issues with `vector<bool>` see papers
[@http://www.gotw.ca/publications/N1211.pdf vector<bool>: N1211: More Problems, Better Solutions], 
[@http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2160.html N2160: Library Issue 96: Fixing vector<bool>],
[@http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2204.html N2204 A Specification to deprecate vector<bool>].

* ["['In 1998, admitting that the committee made a mistake was controversial.
  Since then Java has had to deprecate such significant portions of their libraries
  that the idea C++ would be ridiculed for deprecating a single minor template specialization seems quaint.]]

* ["['`vector<bool>` is not a container and `vector<bool>::iterator` is not a random-access iterator
(or even a forward or bidirectional iterator either, for that matter). This has already broken user code
in the field in mysterious ways.]]

* ["['`vector<bool>` forces a specific (and potentially bad) optimization choice on all users by enshrining
it in the standard. The optimization is premature; different users have different requirements. This too
has already hurt users who have been forced to implement workarounds to disable the 'optimization'
(e.g., by using a vector<char> and manually casting to/from bool).]]

So `boost::container::vector<bool>::iterator` returns real `bool` references and works as a fully compliant container.
If you need a memory optimized version of `boost::container::vector<bool>` functionalities, please use
[@http://www.boost.org/libs/dynamic_bitset/ Boost.DynamicBitset].

[endsect]

[endsect]

[section:other_features Other features]

* Default constructors don't allocate memory which improves performance and
  usually implies a no-throw guarantee (if predicate's or allocator's default constructor doesn't throw).

* Small string optimization for [classref boost::container::basic_string basic_string],
  with an internal buffer of 11/23 bytes (32/64 bit systems)
  [*without] increasing the usual `sizeof` of the string (3 words).

* `[multi]set/map` containers are size optimized embedding the color bit of the red-black tree nodes
   in the parent pointer.

* `[multi]set/map` containers use no recursive functions so stack problems are avoided.

[endsect]

[section:history_and_reasons History and reasons to use Boost.Container]

[section:boost_container_history Boost.Container history]

[*Boost.Container] is a product of a long development effort that started
[@http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2004/11/76263.php in 2004 with the experimental Shmem library],
which pioneered the use of standard containers in shared memory. Shmem included modified SGI STL container
code tweaked to support non-raw `allocator::pointer` types and stateful allocators. Once reviewed,
Shmem was accepted as [@http://www.boost.org/libs/interprocess/ Boost.Interprocess] and this library
continued to refine and improve those containers.

In 2007, container code from node containers (`map`, `list`, `slist`) was rewritten, refactored 
and expanded to build the intrusive container library [@http://www.boost.org/libs/intrusive/ Boost.Intrusive].
[*Boost.Interprocess] containers were refactored to take advantage of [*Boost.Intrusive] containers and
code duplication was minimized. Both libraries continued to gain support and bug fixes for years.
They introduced move semantics, emplacement insertion and more features of then unreleased C++0x
standard.

[*Boost.Interprocess] containers were always standard compliant, and those containers and new
containers like `stable_vector` and `flat_[multi]set/map` were used outside [*Boost.Interprocess]
with success. As containers were mature enough to get their own library, it was a natural step to
collect them containers and build [*Boost.Container], a library targeted to a wider audience.

[endsect]


[section:Why_boost_container Why Boost.Container?]

With so many high quality standard library implementations out there, why would you want to
use [*Boost.Container]? There are several reasons for that:

* If you have a C++03 compiler, you can have access to C++11 features and have an easy
  code migration when you change your compiler.
* It's compatible with [*Boost.Interprocess] shared memory allocators.
* You have extremely useful new containers like `stable_vector` and `flat_[multi]set/map`.
* If you work on multiple platforms, you'll have a portable behaviour without depending
  on the std-lib implementation conformance of each platform. Some examples:
   * Default constructors don't allocate memory at all, which improves performance and
   usually implies a no-throw guarantee (if predicate's or allocator's default constructor doesn't throw).
   * Small string optimization for [classref boost::container::basic_string basic_string].
* New extensions beyond the standard based on user feedback to improve code performance.

[endsect]

[endsect]

[include auto_index_helpers.qbk]

[section:index Indexes]

[named_index class_name Class Index]
[named_index typedef_name Typedef Index]
[named_index function_name Function Index]
[/named_index macro_name Macro Index]
[/index]

[endsect]

[xinclude autodoc.xml]

[section:acknowledgements_notes Acknowledgements, notes and links]

*  Original standard container code comes from [@http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/ SGI STL library],
   which enhanced the original HP STL code. Most of this code was rewritten for
   [*Boost.Interprocess] and moved to [*Boost.Intrusive]. `deque` and `string` containers still
   have fragments of the original SGI code. Many thanks to Alexander Stepanov, Meng Lee, David Musser,
   Matt Austern... and all HP and SGI STL developers.

*  `flat_[multi]_map/set` containers were originally based on [@http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki_%28C%2B%2B%29 Loki's]
   AssocVector class. Code was rewritten and expanded for [*Boost.Interprocess], so thanks to Andrei Alexandrescu.

*  `stable_vector` was invented and coded by
   [@http://bannalia.blogspot.com/2008/09/introducing-stablevector.html Joaqu\u00EDn M. L\u00F3pez Mu\u00F1oz],
   then adapted for [*Boost.Interprocess]. Thanks for such a great container.

*  Howard Hinnant's help and advices were essential when implementing move semantics, 
   improving allocator support or implementing small string optimization. Thanks Howard
   for your wonderful standard library implementations.

*  And finally thanks to all Boosters who helped all these years, improving, fixing and
   reviewing all my libraries.

[endsect]

[section:release_notes Release Notes]

[section:release_notes_boost_1_49_00 Boost 1.49 Release]

*  Fixed bugs
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6540 #6540],
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6499 #6499],
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6336 #6336],
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6335 #6335],
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6287 #6287],
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6205 #6205],
  [@https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4383 #4383].

*  Added `allocator_traits` support for both C++11 and C++03
   compilers through an internal `allocator_traits` clone.

[endsect]

[section:release_notes_boost_1_48_00 Boost 1.48 Release]

*  First release. Container code from [*Boost.Interprocess] was deleted
   and redirected to [*Boost.Container ] via using directives.

[endsect]

[endsect]
