[ San Francisco: ]

Solved by N2770.

Rationale:

Recommend NAD. This will be fixed with the next revision of concepts.

[ Berlin: This issue is much bigger than just tuple (pair, containers, algorithms). Dietmar will survey and work up proposed wording. ]

Proposed resolution:

change 6.1.3.5/5 from:

Returns: The result of a lexicographical comparison between t and u. The result is defined as: (bool)(get<0>(t) < get<0>(u)) || (!(bool)(get<0>(u) < get<0>(t)) && ttail < utail), where rtail for some tuple r is a tuple containing all but the first element of r. For any two zero-length tuples e and f, e < f returns false.

to:

Returns: The result of a lexicographical comparison between t and u. For any two zero-length tuples e and f, e < f returns false. Otherwise, the result is defined as: cmp( get<0>(t), get<0>(u)) || (!cmp(get<0>(u), get<0>(t)) && ttail < utail), where rtail for some tuple r is a tuple containing all but the first element of r, and cmp(x,y) is an unspecified function template defined as follows.

Where T is the type of x and U is the type of y:

if T and U are pointer types and T is convertible to U, returns less<U>()(x,y)

otherwise, if T and U are pointer types, returns less<T>()(x,y)

otherwise, returns (bool)(x < y)

[ 2009-10 Santa Cruz: ]

If we solve this for tuple we would have to solve it for pair algorithms, etc. It is too late to do that at this time. Move to NAD Future.

[ 2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. ]

Where possible, tuple comparison operators <,<=,=>, and > ought to be defined in terms of std::less rather than operator<, in order to support comparison of tuples of pointers.