Subject: Re: [boost] [hash] regular behaviour of hash function for double values
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-31 12:57:32
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 18:33:25 Thomas Klimpel wrote:
> > but my understanding is that it's the hash function's job.
> What do you mean by "my understanding"? Your understanding of the standard,
> or your understanding of the best solution, or your understanding of that
> conversation? You also advocated your "understanding" during that
The standard doesn't favor or preclude either approach, so either way the
implementation would be conforming. So, you might say it's my understanding of
both the standard and the "best" solution. I realize that my opponent had a
different opinion on this and I didn't convince him.
> However, I got the impression that the other party didn't
> really wanted to discuss about that:
> Daniel James wrote:
> > That's really an issue for the standard
> > (a cop out I know, but I don't want to get into this debate).
I remember. And it saddens me.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk