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

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-07 05:51:12

> 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.

Agreed, as long as we are testing proposed extensions, then making them part 
of boost::hash (and hence std::tr1::hash when we get a TR1 implementation up 
and running) is fine.

If we want a library of string hash functions though, we'd better give them 
different names - there are after all many different ways of hashing a 
string.

John.