[boost] [type_erasure] default implementation of concept signatures

Subject: [boost] [type_erasure] default implementation of concept signatures
From: Vicente Botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-28 12:42:03

Hi Steve,

Concepts are able to define default implementations if the type doesn't
provides the specific signature. For example in 20.1.2 Comparisons the
concept LessThanComparable defines a default for implementation for

bool operator>(U const& a, T const& b) { return b < a; }
bool operator<=(U const& a, T const& b) { return !(b < a); }
bool operator>=(T const& a, U const& b) { return !(a < b); }

In the definition of the concept less_than_comparable in Boost.Any, you
define the implementation of these operators in function of operator<(), but
if the types provide the specific signature the specific function is not
called. I guess that the default implementation of for example operator<=
should use operator< only if the the underlying types don't provide
operator<=. 

What do you think?  

Best,
Vicente

--
View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/type-erasure-default-implementation-of-concept-signatures-tp3557724p3557724.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.