From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-11-29 20:32:33
Ahh ok, I see that it does allow for using mixed comparison operators, but
isn't the standard still broken in requiring that T be EqualityComparable?
I don't see why find() would ever use that functionality.
Cheers,
Jeremy
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Matthew Austern wrote:
> Jeremy Siek wrote:
> >
> > Instead of "are clearly legal", did you really mean "should clearly be
> > legal"?
> >
> > The current wording of the standard in 25.1.2 does not explicitly talk
> > about mixed comparisons, it just has T models EqualityComparable.
>
> No, I meant that, in my opinion, it is already clearly legal.
>
> Or to be more precise about what I'm claiming to be legal:
> - It's required that T must be EqualityComparable.
> - I don't think it's required that the operator== that find()
> uses must be the same one that's used when comparing
> one T to another. (This is where I see a difference
> between find() and lower_bound(). For lower_bound, the
> algorithm requires a relationship between the comparison
> used for sorting the list and the comparison used for
> the earch.)
>
> --Matt
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy Siek www: http://www.lsc.nd.edu/~jsiek/
Ph.D. Candidate email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
Univ. of Notre Dame work phone: (219) 631-3906
----------------------------------------------------------------------