David Abrahams wrote: > 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?
I am not trying to shoot down the request but could someone give me a practical example of the case where an optional value which does not exist ( I hope that's the right term for when an optional value has no valid value ) serves as a key in an associative container ? _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
