From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-01 12:43:16
"bwood" <brass_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>> You've been touting multi_index here as well.
>>Not at all. If you follow my recent concern with multi_index design I
>>actually believe it's lacking.
> I read those and was sympathetic to the terminology
> arguments you made. L?pez Mu?oz believes it is too late
> to make those sort of changes. I disagree with him on that,
> but it isn't clear enough yet to me what would be better
> terminology. I didn't follow the other matter you raised
> in those posts.
My point was that we need another level of indirection an in-Order indexing
(along with different orders for the same data).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk