Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen@dezide.com> writes:
Hi,
I couldn't find a way to do this. Maybe I have overlooked something. Anyway, making sure that operator<, operator== does the right thing is pretty important.
Strict weak ordering uses a single operations and does not relate two operations. Thus you can test that < imposes a strict weak ordering, but it can have nothing to do with ==. What you're testing below would need some other name.
I had in mind that I could say
for( each i ) for( each i2 ) BOOST_CHECK_STRICT_WEAK_ORDERING( *i, *i2 );
which would check something like the following:
if( !(*i < *i2) && !(*i2 < *i) ) { BOOST_CHECK( *i == *i2 ); } else if( *i < *i2 ) { BOOST_CHECK( *i != *i2 ); BOOST_CHECK( !(*i2 < *i) ); } else { BOOST_CHECK( *i2 < *i ); BOOST_CHECK( !(*i2 < *i) ); }
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com