From: Gabriel Dos Reis (gdr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-06 18:19:45
Sylvain Pion <pion_at_[hidden]> writes:
| On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 03:28:09PM -0400, Douglas Gregor wrote:
| > > Sure, but at that point, I think it becomes confusing and bug-proning to
| > > provide a default.
| > If there isn't a default like compare_full, then interval<T> can't be used
| > like a numeric type in generic code, so we'll have talked the library out of
| > its intended area of usefulness!
| This is wrong.
| If there is no default, it ONLY means you have to choose a Comparison_policy
In any case, the Compare function is *explicitly* choosen. You should
not confuse semantics with syntax. It is just that when a default
comparaison is provided, it is not *spelled* out. That doesn't mean it
isn't explicity chosen.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk