27 May
2005
27 May
'05
9:10 p.m.
JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote:
IMHO, std::pair default ctor should be defined as
pair():first(),second(){}
This doesn't change things. pair() {} is what you probably want. What can I say, I'm glad that your and Howard's view didn't prevail when std::pair was being defined. If I had it MY way, typedef set<int> int_set; pair<int_set::iterator,int_setÂ::iterator> p; would have compiled on no compiler because int_set::iterator wouldn't even have had a default constructor. (Your code will probably fail at runtime on most debugging STLs, by the way.)