Re: [boost] [optional] operator<(optional<T>, T) -- is it wrong?

Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] operator<(optional<T>, T) -- is it wrong?
From: Gottlob Frege (gottlobfrege_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-28 14:14:22

>
> Regular is a concept. See Stepanov's Elements of Programming.  Or just
> think "int".  ie assignable, copyable, copies are disjoint, etc.
> Stepanov includes ordering as part of Regular (IIRC).
>

P.S. One of the important parts of Regular: it is what the STL
typically assumes.  In Stepanov's world (almost) all types are
Regular. (not that he thinks everything is Regular, but that all the
good things are :-) ie he dislikes and avoids anything that isn't.
Non-Regular should be the rare exception. you should strive to make
your class Regular.)