220 4269 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tony V E Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Fixing Standard Library relational operators (was: Re: optional Rev.4 (N3672): What was the rationale to remove !=, >=, ...) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 21:17:36 -0400 Lines: 99 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <5f236e41-0f5f-4288-a80f-9eadb5168c38@isocpp.org> <47de7d1c-0f32-43f6-9e26-952b87b44dc1@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d17009bf0e404dbda3bff X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1367630264 19922 80.91.229.3 (4 May 2013 01:17:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 01:17:44 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCUZ5QWKNQILJQ4RRQCRUBB6ZFWSC@isocpp.org Sat May 04 03:17:43 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-bk0-f69.google.com ([209.85.214.69]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UYR6b-0005jm-S0 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 May 2013 03:17:41 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-bk0-f69.google.com with SMTP id jm19sf2991084bkc.4 for ; Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:received-spf:mime-version :x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=FOs8btvDJxgkU1wAo3f+wmyfxSgx7wRAmN54G9RNABA=; b=Ewsv+g0UbIWiVTlceNHU2h90I0is6ImH7g3TwgYrlttQwnOgvEem7KNRbpSJRlkREn mygUYvZbjsdTUAq8Jx5kXi7Yc4GFh5BaryQcgnHic00g6+Xl52w0b+EEj6ezYtWjTVXb zhUtNDWxaGhIpZ25+dwP6pA7vL6ljciYoCHThN16kA4FmULRVcB/uI44MTo8waSdwOWn CaqqubDDOHzc8YAkSEyITnOE9ei9/YV/yBddsy1YWBTjOrVJEH3S0uJm5Ht3HRktkAq4 BYf++ePTuGH+xUu89CXuftEXRuXzGeppnMnwFCEF+IoOkU7eu8TENwQLvlf4QPRV05Ed X-Received: by 10.152.28.202 with SMTP id d10mr13495821lah.3.1367630261078; Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:41 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.152.26.35 with SMTP id i3ls13586lag.65.gmail; Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.180.193 with SMTP id dq1mr5055690lbc.60.1367630256480; Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:36 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-lb0-f180.google.com (mail-lb0-f180.google.com [209.85.217.180]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pg5si2781261lbb.214.2013.05.03.18.17.36 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:36 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.180; Original-Received: by mail-lb0-f180.google.com with SMTP id v1so2004217lbd.25 for ; Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.152.21.106 with SMTP id u10mr4946872lae.11.1367630256270; Fri, 03 May 2013 18:17:36 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.112.2.167 with HTTP; Fri, 3 May 2013 18:17:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: tvaneerd@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tvaneerd@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:4269 Archived-At: --089e013d17009bf0e404dbda3bff Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Ville Voutilainen < ville.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 4 May 2013 01:09, Marc wrote: > >> >> But mostly, the rational for providing operator< seems to be so we can >> put it in an std::set, but that's already handled by specializing std::less >> (which I agree should have had a better name), so in my opinion >> std::optional should simply not provide operator< at all. That seems the >> safest thing. >> >> -- >> >> > I have no trouble with the name of std::less. What I wrote before was that > I'd prefer not using std::less for > ordering keys of associative container. ;) > > That I agree with. I always felt map should use something like std::map_less, for example. Which would default to std::less. (Possibly via std::container_less in the middle as well?) I actually don't think that would be a breaking change. Tony -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en. --089e013d17009bf0e404dbda3bff Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Ville Voutilainen <ville= ..voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote:



On 4 May 2013 01:0= 9, Marc <marc.glisse@gmail.com> wrote:

But mostly, the rational for provid= ing operator< seems to be so we can put it in an std::set, but that'= s already handled by specializing std::less (which I agree should have had = a better name), so in my opinion std::optional should simply not provide op= erator< at all. That seems the safest thing.

--


I have no trou= ble with the name of std::less. What I wrote before was that I'd prefer= not using std::less for
ordering keys of associative contain= er. ;)


That I agree w= ith. =A0I always felt map should use something like std::map_less<T>,= for example. =A0Which would default to std::less<T>. =A0(Possibly vi= a std::container_less<T> in the middle as well?)
=A0
I actually don't think that would be a breaking chan= ge.

Tony

--
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro= posals/?hl=3Den.
 
 
--089e013d17009bf0e404dbda3bff-- .