[boost] Re: Any good reason not to have == for shared_ptr?

From: ivan66_at_[hidden]
Date: 1999-11-09 22:49:59

"dave abrahams" <abraham-_at_[hidden]> wrote: 
> P.S. I don't love the idea of defining a non-member op==, etc. with
an eye
> towards encouraging users to specialize for the comparison of object
> contents. It seems rather like a nightmare to have shared_ptr<X> and
> shared_ptr<Y> differ so significantly.

Do you mean that op== should be a member, or that it's OK for it to be
a non-member, but people shouldn't be encouraged to specialize it?

-- Ivan J. Johnson