This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of New status.
Section: 22.10.8 [comparisons], 23.2.2 [container.requirements.general], 32.4.3.2 [thread.thread.id] Status: New Submitter: Matt Austern Opened: 2015-10-08 Last modified: 2015-10-21
Priority: 3
View other active issues in [comparisons].
View all other issues in [comparisons].
View all issues with New status.
Discussion:
A number of places in the library, including 22.10.8 [comparisons]/14, the Optional container requirements in
23.2.2 [container.requirements.general], and 32.4.3.2 [thread.thread.id]/8, use the phrase "total order".
Unfortunately, that phrase is ambiguous. In mathematics, the most common definition is that a relation ≤ is
a total order if it's total, transitive, and antisymmetric in the sense that x≤y ∧ y≤x ⇒ x=y.
What we really want is a strict total order: a relation < is a strict total order if it's total, transitive, and
antisymmetric in the sense that exactly one of x<y, y<x, and x=y holds.
The non-normative note in 26.8 [alg.sorting]/4 correctly uses the phrase "strict total ordering" rather than simply "total ordering".
We could address this issue by replacing "total order" with "strict total order" everywhere it appears, since I think there are no cases where we actually want a non-strict total order, or we could add something in Clause 17 saying that we always mean strict total order whenever we say total order.
Proposed resolution: