|
ALINK="#ff0000">
stack<T, Sequence>
DescriptionA stack is an adaptor that provides a restricted subset of Container functionality: it provides insertion, removal, and inspection of the element at the top of the stack. Stack is a "last in first out" (LIFO) data structure: the element at the top of a stack is the one that was most recently added. [1] Stack does not allow iteration through its elements. [2]Stack is a container adaptor, meaning that it is implemented on top of some underlying container type. By default that underlying type is deque, but a different type may be selected explicitly. Exampleint main() { stack<int> S; S.push(8); S.push(7); S.push(4); assert(S.size() == 3); assert(S.top() == 4); S.pop(); assert(S.top() == 7); S.pop(); assert(S.top() == 8); S.pop(); assert(S.empty()); } DefinitionDefined in the standard header stack, and in the nonstandard backward-compatibility header stack.h.Template parameters
Model ofAssignable, Default ConstructibleType requirements
Public base classesNone.Members
New membersThese members are not defined in the Assignable and Default Constructible requirements, but are specific to stack.
Notes[1] Stacks are a standard data structure, and are discussed in all algorithm books. See, for example, section 2.2.1 of Knuth. (D. E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming. Volume 1: Fundamental Algorithms, second edition. Addison-Wesley, 1973.) [2] This restriction is the only reason for stack to exist at all. Note that any Front Insertion Sequence or Back Insertion Sequence can be used as a stack; in the case of vector, for example, the stack operations are the member functions back, push_back, and pop_back. The only reason to use the container adaptor stack instead is to make it clear that you are performing only stack operations, and no other operations. [3] One might wonder why pop() returns void, instead of value_type. That is, why must one use top() and pop() to examine and remove the top element, instead of combining the two in a single member function? In fact, there is a good reason for this design. If pop() returned the top element, it would have to return by value rather than by reference: return by reference would create a dangling pointer. Return by value, however, is inefficient: it involves at least one redundant copy constructor call. Since it is impossible for pop() to return a value in such a way as to be both efficient and correct, it is more sensible for it to return no value at all and to require clients to use top() to inspect the value at the top of the stack. See alsoqueue, priority_queue, Container, SequenceCopyright © 1999 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All Rights Reserved. TrademarkInformation
|