Re: [v3] Remove algos code duplication

[Marc Glisse <marc dot glisse at inria dot fr>]

On Sun, 25 Mar 2012, Daniel Krügler wrote:

> Am 25. März 2012 22:13 schrieb Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr>:
> > - is there anything wrong with std::less?
>
> Unfortunately yes: User-code can independently specialize std::less, so
> this could cause an observable difference. During concept time Doug
> Gregor suggested to simplify the library specification in that way, but the
> committee could not agree on that because of this observability problem.

Thank you for those precisions.

So using std::__less would be fine (a non-specializable class that 
std::less derives from by default). Or std::__generic_less (with the 
template parameters on the operator, not the class).

Simplifying the library this way would make sense independently from 
concepts.

It is not intuitive, but I think I can begin to see why one might 
specialize std::less and not want that specialization used by algorithms.

Thanks again,

--
Marc Glisse