STL (Not only Stepanov and Lee)

This is a discussion on STL (Not only Stepanov and Lee) within the C++ Programming forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; Originally Posted by R41D3N Just to clarify, he meant the Standard Template Library (STL) part of C++, wherein you dont ...

  1. #1
    Registered User manasij7479's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Kolkata@India
    Posts
    2,498

    STL (Not only Stepanov and Lee)

    Quote Originally Posted by R41D3N View Post
    Just to clarify, he meant the Standard Template Library (STL) part of C++, wherein you dont have to "new-delete" stuff and can have dynamic size even during run-time
    The standard library isn't actually called the STL, though.
    STL was what the C++ containers (and related stuff) were based on.
    Manasij Mukherjee | gcc-4.8.2 @Arch Linux
    Slow and Steady wins the race... if and only if :
    1.None of the other participants are fast and steady.
    2.The fast and unsteady suddenly falls asleep while running !



  2. #2
    Registered User R41D3N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    ...Beyond Infinity, Behind a KeyBoard...
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by manasij7479 View Post
    STL was what the C++ containers (and related stuff) were based on.
    Oh, my bad ...

  3. #3
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,232
    STL was what the C++ containers (and related stuff) were based on.
    O_o

    That's not at all accurate.

    The C++ standard library isn't called the "STL". The "STL" is a part of the C++ standard library.

    The concepts that drive and were to become the "STL" was developed before, beyond, and also as part of the process to standardize C++.

    The various libraries calling themselves "C++ STL" are implementations of that part of the C++ standard library that is also called the "STL".

    So, no, the "STL" isn't based on the C++ standard library and the C++ standard library isn't based on the "STL". The "STL" is part of the C++ standard library and holds that name as coined by members of the standardizing committee.

    Soma

  4. #4
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,662
    Quote Originally Posted by phantomotap
    That's not at all accurate. (...) The "STL" is a part of the C++ standard library.
    Stroustrup's C++ glossary entry for "STL" appears to agree more with manasij7479's assertion that the "STL was what the C++ containers (and related stuff) were based on".

    EDIT:
    Oh, but Stroustrup happily calls the STL "the containers and algorithms part of the ISO C++ standard library" in an FAQ answer. Or is this merely for convenience? But then if it is for convenience, then the statement that the name was "coined by members of the standardizing committee" for that part of the standard library rather than for Stepanov's own early work at HP, makes even more sense.
    Last edited by laserlight; 06-16-2012 at 11:38 AM.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  5. #5
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,232
    Stroustrup's C++ glossary entry for "STL" appears to agree more with manasij7479's assertion that the "STL was what the C++ containers (and related stuff) were based on".
    I'd say that either you are misreading that or I misread the statement made by manasij7479.

    If you are to say that the "STL" (a C++ beast) is based on earlier works developed by Stepanov and cohorts then I'd have to agree because that is a true thing to say, but this earlier work was not the "STL" (C++ wasn't even capable of templates at the time) so can not be said to be the "STL" whether it influenced the standard library or not.

    If you are to say that the "C++ Standard Library" is based on the "STL" then I'd have to disagree because the "STL" (the very first implementation of this C++ beast) was developed and formalized by a "call to arms" during the standardizing of the C++ programming language and library where the committee, Borland and Hewlett-Packard, and Stepanov and cohorts influenced each other until the thing that is the "STL" was folded into chapters 17-27 of the draft where it continued to evolve.

    Soma

  6. #6
    Registered User manasij7479's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Kolkata@India
    Posts
    2,498
    I had the impression that STL was a library written independently in pre standard C++, which was later adopted (but not the acronym itself ) by the standard as the design of the Standard Library.

    I didn't know that it "was developed and formalized by a \"call to arms\" during the standardizing of the C++ programming language and library where the committee, Borland and Hewlett-Packard, and Stepanov and cohorts influenced each other..." .
    Last edited by manasij7479; 06-16-2012 at 12:00 PM.
    Manasij Mukherjee | gcc-4.8.2 @Arch Linux
    Slow and Steady wins the race... if and only if :
    1.None of the other participants are fast and steady.
    2.The fast and unsteady suddenly falls asleep while running !



  7. #7
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,232
    [Edit]
    Actually, because I'm fairly sure I partially misinterpreted manasij7479 I think I'll leave this now to go back "on topic".

    Or maybe split it off?

    *shrug*

    You know; I don't care. I'm going to go kill zombies!
    [/Edit]

    Or is this merely for convenience?
    Pretty much every member of the standard board has referenced the "STL" as the "STL".

    Certainly from what I recall (I may be missing a book.) every book by a member of the standard board refers to the "STL" (as being a part of the standard library) at some point.

    But then if it is for convenience, then the statement that the name was "coined by members of the standardizing committee" for that part of the standard library rather than for Stepanov's own early work at HP, makes even more sense.
    I actually still have the early drafts, some of the published communications, the original source, and Stepanov's own notes somewhere in my archives.

    From what I can recall, Stepanov never had intended to develop a C++ library implementing his ideas (C++ at the time had no real generics support.) until Hewitt-Packard (He was already working at HP at the time.) offered him the opportunity to advance his ideas using facilities in the evolving C++ language. He never called it the "STL" until after Stroustrup had succeeded in bullying other members of the standard committee.

    *shrug*

    Of course, we can't know how much of that actually happened. I'm only going by what the men themselves have said.

    I had the impression that STL was a library written independently in pre standard C++, which was later adopted by the standard as the design of the Standard Library.
    A part of that statement is necessarily true.

    The "STL", as a component of the standard library, is part of the first international standard for the C++ programming language. It couldn't have been written in standard C++ because no standard existed as it was being created.

    Soma
    Last edited by phantomotap; 06-16-2012 at 12:39 PM.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,027
    The STL is the coloquial reference to the part of the standard library that deals with containers, iterators, algorithims, and all that. The standard probably does not use the term itself though.

    "STL containers" is probably clearer to say than "standard containers," because primative arrays could be argued to be "standard containers". "Standard container" could mean STL compatible container, which is not the intended meaning here.
    It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
    A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
    Had he known what fire was,
    He could have cooked his rice much sooner.

  9. #9
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,662
    Quote Originally Posted by phantomotap
    Or maybe split it off?
    Well bid and done.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  10. #10
    Algorithm Dissector iMalc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    6,302
    Quote Originally Posted by phantomotap View Post
    You know; I don't care. I'm going to go kill zombies!
    Works for me too... Either Left 4 Dead 2 or Plants vs Zombies.
    What's your zombie game of choice?
    My homepage
    Advice: Take only as directed - If symptoms persist, please see your debugger

    Linus Torvalds: "But it clearly is the only right way. The fact that everybody else does it some other way only means that they are wrong"

  11. #11
    Registered User R41D3N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    ...Beyond Infinity, Behind a KeyBoard...
    Posts
    29
    @iMalc: Off those 2 I'd prefer PvZ ... L4D 2 is a bit gory~ish for me. Though Prototype 2 aint that bad even with some gore in it

    So end result of the topic is "the Standard Template Library (STL) part of C++ Standard" was not wrong?
    -- reserved for when I come up with 1 --

  12. #12
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,232
    What's your zombie game of choice?
    I don't really do the "Left 4 Dead", but I do have a weird obsession with "Plants versus Zombies".

    It depends on my mood. I still love and play "Nazi Zombies" in the incarnations I own. (Heck, it is the only reason I still own the last "COD" I bought seeing as I didn't like the other bits of the game.) I also still play "The Island of Dr. Ned". (A game where you can head-shot 100 zombies in a single minute with a rifle thanks to bullets passing through the brain box for the zombie shot and a few behind it.) I also really like "I made a game with Zombies in it!".

    Soma

  13. #13
    Registered User manasij7479's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Kolkata@India
    Posts
    2,498
    Quote Originally Posted by R41D3N View Post
    Though Prototype 2 aint that bad even with some gore in it
    Some ?
    That game is all about gore. :P
    Seriously, whoever thought that jumping up and skiing with a dead body was a good move, must've been really sick !
    Manasij Mukherjee | gcc-4.8.2 @Arch Linux
    Slow and Steady wins the race... if and only if :
    1.None of the other participants are fast and steady.
    2.The fast and unsteady suddenly falls asleep while running !



  14. #14
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,232
    Seriously, whoever thought that jumping up and skiing with a dead body was a good move, must've been really sick !
    And now I'm compelled to go buy a copy of "Prototype 2" thank you very much...

    Soma

  15. #15
    Registered User R41D3N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    ...Beyond Infinity, Behind a KeyBoard...
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by manasij7479 View Post
    Some ?
    That game is all about gore. :P
    Seriously, whoever thought that jumping up and skiing with a dead body was a good move, must've been really sick !
    You dont like it? I loved it ... And even where you absorb the zombies for health .. What can I say, I am ebil!
    -- reserved for when I come up with 1 --

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21