"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > David Abrahams wrote: > > But, IIUC, if operator< is not provided, you'd oppose a std::less > > specialization, right? > > Right. When there is one and only one strict weak ordering (equality) for a > type, not using operator< and operator== because some users might have > different expectations is misguided. It is pretty clear what set<variant> or > find(first, last, v) is supposed to do; variant_less or variant_equal is > "required boilerplate" as Howard says. :-)
Thanks! Full ACK! Dirk _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
