From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-22 15:00:49
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> So I think that we are just getting a false sense of security out of
> leaving the default empty.
OK, let's leave equivalence out of it. What is the default for an arbitrary
object x of user-defined type X? You claim that it's hash_range( x.begin(),
x.end() ), but this is obviously incorrect in the vast majority of cases. I
claim that there is no default.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk