From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-25 11:02:42
Ben Young <ben.young_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, David Abrahams wrote:
>> Ben Young <ben.young_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> > Recently at our company we had a couple of bugs relating to people
>> > incorrectly writing comparison operators, so I came up with this little
>> > helper. It is very trivial, but useful none the less as bogus comparison
>> > operators can be the cause of many bugs.
>> > Obviously it could be improved to take a predictate of some kind and
>> > checged to use the boost pre-processor library, but, otherwise, is anyone
>> > interested
>> Did you ever consider using
>> make_tuple(x1, y1, z1) < make_tuple(x2, y2, z2)
> Yes, but actually I am of the feeling that perhaps the tuple library
> should be using the strict_... form rather than the other way around.
> Won't the make_tuple method make a copy of all its arguments?
make_tuple(ref(x1), ref(y1), ref(z1)) < ...
Anyway, in the past I have needed/wanted the strict_... function
family you propose, but:
1. I would call it lexicographic_ordering
2. I would like to be able to specify the comparison used for
each of the parameters
-- David Abrahams dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk