From: Sylvain Pion (pion_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-06 14:07:16
On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 12:12:17PM -0400, David Bergman wrote:
> But we will not find such a ordering (at least not a total one, which is
> required by STLish use). Does this mean that we should give up the idea
> of using intervals in (associative) containers, and in traversing
Of course it's going to be possible !
But there will be no _default_ order, because there is no suitable default !
You will have to code your functor (if you use the default std::less, it will
fall back on the Comparison_policy).
No big deal, right ? And this way you will have to know what you do.
> We could add a disclaimer that "this ordering is a pragmatic solution
> and there is no aspiration on it being of any more relevance than others
> as to the domain of intervals, but we could not find anyone better,
> being total, sorry".
Sure, but at that point, I think it becomes confusing and bug-proning to
provide a default.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk