Re: [boost] Boost.Algorithm design question

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Algorithm design question
From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-31 07:12:59

Dave Abrahams wrote:
> I think you're missing the point, which is:
>
>   When the specification for an algorithm exposes the actual expressions
>   used in a given implementation of an algorithm, it tends to lock down
>   the implementation in ways that don't necessarily make sense (and can
>   prevent optimizations).  Tiny details that one usually doesn't
>   consider, like whether part of the expression is an lvalue or an
>   rvalue, const or non-const, become encoded into the specification of
>   the algorithm.

None of this has anything to do with the fact that you want to require 
operator== to be an equivalence relation, and it doesn't have to be.