Re: [boost] shared_ptr and std::less (was Re: Smart pointer status, directions, thoughts)

From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-05-26 14:10:26

----- Original Message -----
From: "Darin Adler" <darin_at_[hidden]>

> not standard-conforming. But I now see that 17.3.4.1p1 specifically says
> that the specialization must "meet the standard library requirements for
> the original template", and that in the case of std::less, that means it
> must have the same result as using the < operator directly.
>
> This was the point I missed in your original posting. Perhaps you assumed
> this was common base knowledge and didn't need to be called out.
>
> It seems like a compelling argument to me that does justify a change to
> shared_ptr.
>
> Beman, Greg, Dave, what do you think?

On first sight I'd say Peter may have uncovered a defect in the standard. I
don't think we meant to say that about std::less<>.

-Dave