This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of NAD status.

### 1053. Unify algorithms with operator and function object variants

Section: 25 [algorithms] Status: NAD Submitter: Alisdair Meredith Opened: 2009-03-12 Last modified: 2017-06-05

Priority: Not Prioritized

View other active issues in [algorithms].

View all other issues in [algorithms].

View all issues with NAD status.

Discussion:

Addresses UK 295 [CD1]

There is a level of redundancy in the library specification for many algorithms that can be eliminated with the combination of concepts and default parameters for function templates. Eliminating redundancy simplified specification and reduces the risk of introducing accidental inconsistencies.

Proposed resolution: Adopt N2743.

[ Summit: ]

> NAD, this change would break code that takes the address of an algorithm.

[ Post Summit Alisdair adds: ]

> Request 'Open'. The issues in the paper go beyond just reducing the number of signatures, but cover unifying the idea of the ordering operation used by algorithms, containers and other library components. At least, it takes a first pass at the problem.

> For me (personally) that was the more important part of the paper, and not clearly addressed by the Summit resolution.

[ 2009-10 Santa Cruz: ]

> Too inventive, too late, would really need a paper. Moved to NAD Future.

[2017-02 in Kona, LEWG recommends NAD (NAD-ABI)]

Concept specific, might be solved by Ranges. Get it right in STD2 or with the next big ABI break.

[2017-06-02 Issues Telecon]

Resolve as NAD

Proposed resolution: