From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-10 16:35:56
JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote:
>
> Maybe the following approach could be taken to
> allow for alternative implementations to be plugged into
> the framework: [...]
> unordered_set<my_type,boost::hash<my_type,crypto_impl> > us;
The proposal is not a framework, it contains two simple tools for
constructing hash_value overloads for compound types and a suite of
_default_ hash functions.
Alternative implementations (who may or may not use the supplied tools) are
supported by unordered_set by simply using
unordered_set< my_type, my_hash > us;
There's no need to plug them in.