In C++, both `emplace` and `push` are used to add elements to containers, but there are some differences in how they operate. When dealing with `std::span`, which is a lightweight view over a contiguous sequence of objects, it's essential to note that `std::span` itself does not support `emplace` or `push` directly, as it is not a container but rather a wrapper around an array or a contiguous data structure.
The `emplace` method typically constructs an object in place at the end of a container (like `std::vector`), while `push` simply adds an object to the container. When using fixed-size spans, the structure of the data should already be established at the time of creating the `std::span`, making both `emplace` and `push` methods irrelevant for spans.
// Example in C++
#include
#include
class Example {
int value;
public:
Example(int v) : value(v) {}
void show() { std::cout << value << std::endl; }
};
int main() {
std::vector vec;
// Using push (if we had an existing Example object)
Example ex1(1);
vec.push_back(ex1); // Copying the object
// Using emplace (to construct the object directly in place)
vec.emplace_back(2); // Constructs Example(2) in place
for (auto& item : vec) {
item.show();
}
return 0;
}
How do I avoid rehashing overhead with std::set in multithreaded code?
How do I find elements with custom comparators with std::set for embedded targets?
How do I erase elements while iterating with std::set for embedded targets?
How do I provide stable iteration order with std::unordered_map for large datasets?
How do I reserve capacity ahead of time with std::unordered_map for large datasets?
How do I erase elements while iterating with std::unordered_map in multithreaded code?
How do I provide stable iteration order with std::map for embedded targets?
How do I provide stable iteration order with std::map in multithreaded code?
How do I avoid rehashing overhead with std::map in performance-sensitive code?
How do I merge two containers efficiently with std::map for embedded targets?