> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Lemings
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:24 AM
> To: '[email protected]'
> Subject: RE: structure of tuple tests ([Fwd: Re: svn commit:
> r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x: include/rw/_tuple.h
> include/tuple tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
> tests/utilities/20.tuple.creation.cpp
> tests/utilities/20.tuple.h tests/utilities/20.tuple.helpers
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric Lemings
> > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:47 AM
> > To: '[email protected]'
> > Subject: RE: structure of tuple tests ([Fwd: Re: svn commit:
> > r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x: include/rw/_tuple.h
> > include/tuple tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
> > tests/utilities/20.tuple.creation.cpp
> > tests/utilities/20.tuple.h tests/utilities/20.tuple.helpers
> >
> >
> ...
> > > In 20.tuple.cnstr.cpp you might also be able to get rid of
> > > <cstring> by using rw_strncmp(). You should also be able
> > > to use rw_equal() instead of defining a special helper (if
> > > rw_equal() doesn't do something we need to do in the tuple
> > > tests maybe we could extend it?)
> >
> > Was not aware of those. I'll try to reuse them.
>
> I believe this is a safe enhancement to rw_equal() but I just
> wanna make sure:
>
> template <class T, class U = T>
> inline int rw_equal (T x, U y)
> {
> return x == y;
> }
>
> This would allow comparison of different but compatible types
> which is needed for heterogenous tuple types. Anyone see a
> problem with it?
One problem with rw_equal(), as it relates to tuple tests, is that the
arguments are copied. This poses a problem for user-defined types (esp.
UserDefined) which keeps track of and more importantly tests such
things.
I don't think it would be possible to change rw_equal() as follows:
template <class T, class U = T>
inline bool rw_equal (const T& x, const U& y)
{
return x == y;
}
Or would it?
Brad.
