From: Gabriel Dos Reis (gdr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-06 04:23:55
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
| From: "Sylvain Pion" <pion_at_[hidden]>
| > But you said :
| > > There's also the argument that exact comparison of floating point
| > > is usually a waste of time due to rounding errors, so the application
| > > map keys may not be a compelling one.
| > I wasn't sure what you meant, so that was my interpretation.
| > Could you clarify what you meant here, in what does it differ from my
| > interpretation ?
| All I meant was that it might not be worth worrying about having a
| *convenient* way to use intervals as associative keys if it's not a very
| compelling use-case. How often does anyone use a double as an associative
A year ago, I often needed in some of programs then to say
std::map<double, T> fun;
(Yes, I know what comparaison on double means with respect to reals.).
| What about std::complex<>?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk