Re: creating a vector of a vector of Gtk::ToggleButton

[Carl Nygard <cjnygard fast net>]

On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 11:13, Rob Benton wrote:
> Paul Davis wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >	
> >	typedef std::vector<Gtk::ToggleButton*> chiprow;
> >	std::vector<chiprow*> _chips;
> >
> >your mileage may vary as to whether you consider a ToggleButton to
> >have "weight". note that this approach also means that vector::clear()
> >(and container::clear() in general) does *not* free the objects
> >pointed to, which can be problematic sometimes.
> >
> >--p
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> I'm glad you mentioned that.  I was wondering about the cost of pointer 
> vs local object.  Just looking at your example though would I really 
> need to define _chips as a vector to pointers or would this work as well:
> 
> typedef std::vector<Gtk::ToggleButton *> chiprow;
> std::vector<chiprow> _chips;

Do that.  You don't want to deal with vector<chiprow*>, for the same
reason you don't really want the headache of
vector<Gtk::ToggleButton*>.  You could wrap chiprow* in a smart pointer,
but it's totally unnecessary.