Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Edward Diener wrote: > >> Do you really want the key to an associative container to be an optional >> value ? I would be hard-pressed to find a use for that. > > FWIW, the Signals library actually does this internally (although with > boost::any objects instead of boost::optional objects). However, I would > contend that the need is too specialized to warrant adding an operator<.
Seems entirely reasonable to me to add it. It looks like at least two people have needed exactly those semantics. What's the cost? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
