I'm operating on two vectors of pairs of numbers, currently represented by
std::pair. The first vector is a list of (net,pin) pairs,
while the second vector is a list of (pin, net) pairs.
In order to raise a bit the understandability / abstraction level of my code, I
think that it'd be nice to be able to write at_key<pin>(x) and at_key<net>(x)
instead of x.first or using tie().
Looking at fusion manual, it seems that of all the containers, map suits the
purpose:
struct pin;
struct net;
First question: are Map1 and Map2 different types?
typedef map, pair > Map1;
typedef map, pair > Map2;
According to a simple test program that I wrote, which basically boils down to
Map m1; Map m2; m1 = m2; they, are different because the compilation fails.
Hmm, so far, so good.
Second question: some algorithms are common both for both types, e.g. sort,
where I want to have lexicographical comparison between the elements. Is it
possible to somehow transform Map1 and Map2 so that they both appear as
typedef vector > Pair
with proper lexicographical ordering? OK, there are conversion metafunctions,
but I want something more; the following code
std::vector<Map1> m;
std::sort(m.begin(), m.end());
should process vector elements (Map1s) _as_if_ they were Pairs or ordinary
std::pair. I see there are conversion metafunctions defined in documentation,
but I don't know how to use them to convert std::vector<Map1> to
std::vector<Pair> when giving m as argument to sort() [if this is possible
at all].
Sorry for the long post and if it is somewhat vague.
===
(I could probably avoid using fusion by manually defining two different struct
types, each holding pin/net members and defining operator< for each, but I
want to finally get my hands dirty with fusion on a concrete, not too complex
problem that I'm facing right now.)
