Re: [boost] [hash] Extract module from functional + std::hash_combine

Subject: Re: [boost] [hash] Extract module from functional + std::hash_combine
From: Richard Hodges (hodges.r_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-12-19 15:59:58

> hash was part of TR1

TR1 was circulated in 2005. std::hash had 6 years to up its game before
2011. Boost managed it.

I have read google's proposal on improving std::hash. It's not as if the
committee is unaware of the general uselessness of std::hash.

Unless std::hash is raised to the level of competency enjoyed by boost
hash, there is no point do any further work on it. It will remain
un-useable.

It is simply laughably inconvenient to have to inject hash specialisations
into the std namespace.

Please don't waste your valuable time. Just adopt boost::hash into std.

On 19 December 2017 at 16:36, Steven Watanabe via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> AMDG
>
> On 12/19/2017 08:23 AM, Richard Hodges via Boost wrote:
> >> The C++11 std::hash was specified before boost::hash was created, so...
> >
> > source :
> > https://github.com/boostorg/functional/blob/develop/
> include/boost/functional/hash/hash.hpp
> >
> > // Copyright 2005-2014 Daniel James.
> > // Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See
> > accompanying
> > // file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
> >
> > You're saying that the c++11 standard codified std::hash in 2005? This
> > seems to me to be an extraordinary claim.
> >
>
> hash was part of TR1
>
> > More likely is that std::hash is the retarded cousin of boost::hash, and
> > the c++11 committee's gravest error.
> >
>
> In Christ,
> Steven Watanabe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/
> mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>