Joerg Walter <jhr.walter <at> t-online.de> writes: [...]
Is it only me, or did you forget to attach the code?
Nope, we either have a mailing list or an OE problem. Uploaded to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/tcs.cpp
Thanks
I miserably failed to define a composite unique key for my indexed_set.
[...]
I already had. Trying to define
typedef is::indexed_set< study, is::index_list< is::non_unique<is::tag<student_tag>, is::identity<study>, advisor_comparer>, is::non_unique<is::tag<advisor_tag>, is::identity<study>, date_comparer> is::unique<is::tag<pk_tag>, compose_key< BOOST_INDEXED_SET_MEMBER(study, string, name), BOOST_INDEXED_SET_MEMBER(study, string, advisor) > >,
tcs_genealogy;
failed to compile in compose_key's
template<typename Arg> result_type operator()(Arg& arg)const;
Now I think I know what you're after. compose_key composes two keys the way mathematical composition of functions work, i.e. comp_key(arg) := key1(key2(arg)) and this is not what you want to do (if I understood you right.) Instead, you may use lex_compare (as you are already doing in your TCS port.) [...]
If namespace boost is not OK, then namespace boost::container probably would be a better choice.
But I think auxiliary components (index_list, unique, tag, etc.) should have a namespace of their own. They're too specific to inhabit boost::container, IMHO. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo