From 1703841598834258827
X-Google-Thread: f78e5,9ffd8c1080c8181f,start
X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.zanker.org!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!pe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk!blueyonder!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!stump.algebra.com!devnull
From: caj@cs.york.ac.uk (Chris Jefferson)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Comments on 1745 (latest TR1)
Date: Tue,  1 Feb 2005 03:18:55 GMT
Organization: The University of York, UK
Lines: 20
Sender: mail2news@demon.net
Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++)
Message-ID: <ctlrc4$hrq$1@pump1.york.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.news.demon.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1107227994 9189 158.152.254.254 (1 Feb 2005 03:19:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 03:19:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
X-User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cs.mu.OZ.AU
X-Received: (from fjh@localhost)
	by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id j113Itek011886;
	Tue, 1 Feb 2005 14:18:55 +1100 (EST)
X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail
X-NNTP-Posting-Date: 31 Jan 2005 17:54:12 GMT
X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu
X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f
X-York-MailScanner-From: news@york.ac.uk
X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
X-York-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:3998

Two comments.. sorry if these have been made before.

1) In 6.1.3.5-5, there are (bool) casts in a number of places. This is 
related to open defect 484. Can this be taken as a sign that standard 
algorithms should cast all calls to things like <, etc?

2) There doesn't seem to be a swap overload for tuple. Is there some 
reason why one isn't present? It seems like for pair to be an obvious 
thing to have with no obvious problems, but if it will slightly change 
behaviour when an attempting at swapping fails part way through, so it 
has to really be in the standard from the start.

Chris

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]



