Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   The difference is that it will use a hash table rather than a binary tree.

>         I mistakenly thought the current map already did that...

  It's impossible to use a hash table and get the elements in increasing
order with a linear traversal. (Ok, it *is* possible, but then you get an
extremely inefficient hash table.)

>         So the onus of coming up with a function will be on the user?

  It's impossible to provide good (or even working) hash functions for
all possible user-defined types.

> Will it provide some defaults?

  I don't know.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message