[ub] Justification for < not being a total order on pointers?

Nevin Liber nevin at eviloverlord.com
Wed Oct 16 17:40:45 CEST 2013


On 16 October 2013 10:37, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at axiomatics.org> wrote:

>
> | It would be surprising that:
> |
> | set<T, less<T>> works, but
> | set<T, less<>> does not.
>
> Make T = std::less<std::complex<MyFloat>> and instantiate the argument :-)
>

Neither operator< nor less<complex> is defined by the standard.
-- 
 Nevin ":-)" Liber  <mailto:nevin at eviloverlord.com>  (847) 691-1404
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.open-std.org/pipermail/ub/attachments/20131016/658bac1c/attachment.html 


More information about the ub mailing list