Re: [boost] Re: [boost.tr1?] request for a hash<> implementation

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-06 06:35:46

Daniel James wrote:
>
> I agree, but should it be available in Boost.Tr1? I guess that I could
> provide two different versions: boost::hash, which implements Peter's
> version, and std::tr1::hash, which is a strict implementation of the
> standard, but uses boost::hash_value as an implementation detail (so
> there isn't much code duplication).

The proposed enhancement of hash<> is supposed to be a conforming extension 
and something that I feel needs to be part of TR1.x.

On the one hand, one might say that using our hash<> would make it hard for 
people to migrate to std::tr1, although boost::hash can still be used.

But on the other hand, if we are to propose (again) an enhancement to 
tr1::hash, we need to have tested it in the field, or it wouldn't be 
accepted (again). Boost has always been about extensions.