std::priority_queue derivable?

[red floyd]

I know it's generally bad from to derive from STL containers. That
said, here's my question:

I am using std:riority_queue<>. However, I need to be able to access
the underlying container; specifically, I need to be able to get at
begin() and end() for it.

Josuttis (10.3.3) shows that the compare operator and the container are
*protected* members of std:riority_queue. This would lead me to
believe that it was intended for derivation. I was thinking about doing
something like this:

class my_data { /* contents redacted */ };
class my_priority_queue : private std:riority_queue<my_data>
{
public:
typedef std:riority_queue<my_data> pq;
using pq::top;
using pq:ush;
using pq:op;
using pq::empty;
using pq::size;
my_priority_queue();
~my_priority_queue();
void do_something_to_all_elements(); // uses c.begin() and c.end()
};

Is this kosher?

 

[Gianni Mariani]

I know it's generally bad from to derive from STL containers.

It's fine to derive from STL containers.

That

said, here's my question:

I am using std:riority_queue<>. However, I need to be able to access
the underlying container; specifically, I need to be able to get at
begin() and end() for it.

Josuttis (10.3.3) shows that the compare operator and the container are
*protected* members of std:riority_queue. This would lead me to
believe that it was intended for derivation. I was thinking about doing
something like this:

class my_data { /* contents redacted */ };
class my_priority_queue : private std:riority_queue<my_data>
{
public:
typedef std:riority_queue<my_data> pq;
using pq::top;
using pq:ush;
using pq:op;
using pq::empty;
using pq::size;
my_priority_queue();
~my_priority_queue();
void do_something_to_all_elements(); // uses c.begin() and c.end()
};

Is this kosher?

In theory, this should work, however a (in)famous C++ compiler does not
accept this. (MSVC). To work around it, I redefine the methods inline
in the dervied class.

 

[red floyd]

It's fine to derive from STL containers.

That



In theory, this should work, however a (in)famous C++ compiler does not
accept this. (MSVC). To work around it, I redefine the methods inline
in the dervied class.

Thanks. I guess that it's MSVC6 that doesn't like it. MSVC7.1 does,
as does g++ 3.2.2