From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-12 06:11:40
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
| > "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| > news:005901c53e6f$4a180fb0$6501a8c0_at_pdimov2...
| >> Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
| >>> as a related issue, an array is a range, so why define hash_value
| >>> for it?
| >> So that you can call hash_combine with an array member, something
| >> like
| > what if the member is any other range?
| It should still work, unless the other type (nothing to do with range-ness)
| does not have a hash_value overload.
well, that a question of definition.
| > I'm saying the decision to overload hash_value for arrays seems a bit
| > arbitrary.
| We overload hash_value for every standard container. Array support doesn't
| seem very arbitrary.
| You seem a bit obsessed with ranges. ;-)
yeah, I know :-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk