Re: [boost] Please don't define a fake"operator<"just for orderedcontainers

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-11 17:29:00

Sean Parent wrote:

>> This could have been avoided by defining a separate relation for
>> set/map
>> order, either as a function reachable via ADL, or as a function
>> object, then
>> making sure that it is defined for all standard value types.

> Why is this necessary? std::less<> serves us well and avoids the
> whole ADL mess.

std::less is ambiguous. It could be that you wanted merely the function 
object representation of operator<, or it could be that you wanted the 
default map/set ordering relation. It is not clear which of the two 
std::less is supposed to be.

To give you an example, what would you expect std::greater<K> to do? 
less_equal<K>?