David Abrahams wrote:
> "Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> If you want a second opinion, I'm in the "just provide operator== and
>> operator<" camp.
>
> But, IIUC, if operator< is not provided, you'd oppose a std::less
> specialization, right?
Right. When there is one and only one stri
"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> "Eric Friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Ultimately, I do not believe any ordering scheme will provide
>>> meaningful, straightforward semantics. Assuming I am correct, I
>>> propose that the variant library offer your
David Abrahams wrote:
> "Eric Friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Ultimately, I do not believe any ordering scheme will provide
>> meaningful, straightforward semantics. Assuming I am correct, I
>> propose that the variant library offer your ordering scheme -- but
>> only as an explicit comp
