Re: [boost] Interval Library and comparison operators

From: Sylvain Pion (pion_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-06 15:56:39

On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 09:25:32PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | But there will be no _default_ order, because there is no suitable default !
> 
> No suitable default for *exactly what*?

Suitable for the _primary_ usage of intervals, i.e. controlling roundoff
errors, not serving as keys in ordered containers.

People say it's no good to have std::less different from operator<,
so it should be the same.
Your suggested lexicographic order as default is senseless for the primary
usage.

-- 
Sylvain