Subject: Re: [boost] interprocess with unordered_map
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-19 07:18:59
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Joel <jdy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 2012/3/17 Ion Gaztañaga <igaztanaga <at> gmail.com>:
>> > If we want to achieve direct comparison, Boost.Unordered needs to go
>> > Boost.Intrusive or Boost.Multiindex route, and offer additional search
>> > overloads that can find "equivalent keys":
> Olaf van der Spek <ml <at> vdspek.org> writes:
>> That route looks like a good one. Avoiding the need for expensive
>> temps is great.
> Perhaps map and flat_map need this as well? Should bugs be filed?
All find() might be affected, but it may be a conscious design decision.
You could file bugs and find out.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk