123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160 |
- /*!
- @file
- Forward declares `boost::hana::Comparable`.
- @copyright Louis Dionne 2013-2017
- Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
- (See accompanying file LICENSE.md or copy at http://boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
- */
- #ifndef BOOST_HANA_FWD_CONCEPT_COMPARABLE_HPP
- #define BOOST_HANA_FWD_CONCEPT_COMPARABLE_HPP
- #include <boost/hana/config.hpp>
- BOOST_HANA_NAMESPACE_BEGIN
- //! @ingroup group-concepts
- //! @defgroup group-Comparable Comparable
- //! The `Comparable` concept defines equality and inequality.
- //!
- //! Intuitively, `Comparable` objects must define a binary predicate named
- //! `equal` that returns whether both objects represent the same abstract
- //! value. In other words, `equal` must check for deep equality. Since
- //! "representing the same abstract value" is difficult to express
- //! formally, the exact meaning of equality is partially left to
- //! interpretation by the programmer with the following guidelines:\n
- //! 1. Equality should be compatible with copy construction; copy
- //! constructing a value yields an `equal` value.
- //! 2. Equality should be independent of representation; an object
- //! representing a fraction as `4/8` should be `equal` to an object
- //! representing a fraction as `2/4`, because they both represent
- //! the mathematical object `1/2`.
- //!
- //! Moreover, `equal` must exhibit properties that make it intuitive to
- //! use for determining the equivalence of objects, which is formalized
- //! by the laws for `Comparable`.
- //!
- //!
- //! Minimal complete definition
- //! ---------------------------
- //! 1. `equal`\n
- //! When `equal` is defined, `not_equal` is implemented by default as its
- //! complement. For all objects `x`, `y` of a `Comparable` tag,
- //! @code
- //! not_equal(x, y) == not_(equal(x, y))
- //! @endcode
- //!
- //!
- //! Laws
- //! ----
- //! `equal` must define an [equivalence relation][1], and `not_equal` must
- //! be its complement. In other words, for all objects `a`, `b`, `c` with
- //! a `Comparable` tag, the following must hold:
- //! @code
- //! equal(a, a) // Reflexivity
- //! if equal(a, b) then equal(b, a) // Symmetry
- //! if equal(a, b) && equal(b, c) then equal(a, c) // Transitivity
- //! not_equal(a, b) is equivalent to not_(equal(a, b))
- //! @endcode
- //!
- //!
- //! Concrete models
- //! ---------------
- //! `hana::integral_constant`, `hana::map`, `hana::optional`, `hana::pair`,
- //! `hana::range`, `hana::set`, `hana::string`, `hana::tuple`,
- //! `hana::type`
- //!
- //!
- //! Free model for `EqualityComparable` data types
- //! ----------------------------------------------
- //! Two data types `T` and `U` that model the cross-type EqualityComparable
- //! concept presented in [N3351][2] automatically model the `Comparable`
- //! concept by setting
- //! @code
- //! equal(x, y) = (x == y)
- //! @endcode
- //! Note that this also makes EqualityComparable types in the
- //! [usual sense][3] models of `Comparable` in the same way.
- //!
- //!
- //! Equality-preserving functions
- //! -----------------------------
- //! Let `A` and `B` be two `Comparable` tags. A function @f$f : A \to B@f$
- //! is said to be equality-preserving if it preserves the structure of the
- //! `Comparable` concept, which can be rigorously stated as follows. For
- //! all objects `x`, `y` of tag `A`,
- //! @code
- //! if equal(x, y) then equal(f(x), f(y))
- //! @endcode
- //! Equivalently, we simply require that `f` is a function in the usual
- //! mathematical sense. Another property is [injectivity][4], which can be
- //! viewed as being a "lossless" mapping. This property can be stated as
- //! @code
- //! if equal(f(x), f(y)) then equal(x, y)
- //! @endcode
- //! This is equivalent to saying that `f` maps distinct elements to
- //! distinct elements, hence the "lossless" analogy. In other words, `f`
- //! will not collapse distinct elements from its domain into a single
- //! element in its image, thus losing information.
- //!
- //! These functions are very important, especially equality-preserving
- //! ones, because they allow us to reason simply about programs. Also
- //! note that the property of being equality-preserving is taken for
- //! granted in mathematics because it is part of the definition of a
- //! function. We feel it is important to make the distinction here
- //! because programming has evolved differently and as a result
- //! programmers are used to work with functions that do not preserve
- //! equality.
- //!
- //!
- //! Cross-type version of the methods
- //! ---------------------------------
- //! The `equal` and `not_equal` methods are "overloaded" to handle
- //! distinct tags with certain properties. Specifically, they are
- //! defined for _distinct_ tags `A` and `B` such that
- //! 1. `A` and `B` share a common tag `C`, as determined by the
- //! `common` metafunction
- //! 2. `A`, `B` and `C` are all `Comparable` when taken individually
- //! 3. @f$ \mathtt{to<C>} : A \to C @f$ and @f$\mathtt{to<C>} : B \to C@f$
- //! are both equality-preserving and injective (i.e. they are embeddings),
- //! as determined by the `is_embedding` metafunction.
- //!
- //! The method definitions for tags satisfying the above properties are
- //! @code
- //! equal(x, y) = equal(to<C>(x), to<C>(y))
- //! not_equal(x, y) = not_equal(to<C>(x), to<C>(y))
- //! @endcode
- //!
- //!
- //! Important note: special behavior of `equal`
- //! -------------------------------------------
- //! In the context of programming with heterogeneous values, it is useful
- //! to have unrelated objects compare `false` instead of triggering an
- //! error. For this reason, `equal` adopts a special behavior for
- //! unrelated objects of tags `T` and `U` that do not satisfy the above
- //! requirements for the cross-type overloads. Specifically, when `T` and
- //! `U` are unrelated (i.e. `T` can't be converted to `U` and vice-versa),
- //! comparing objects with those tags yields a compile-time false value.
- //! This has the effect that unrelated objects like `float` and
- //! `std::string` will compare false, while comparing related objects that
- //! can not be safely embedded into the same super structure (like
- //! `long long` and `float` because of the precision loss) will trigger a
- //! compile-time assertion. Also note that for any tag `T` for which the
- //! minimal complete definition of `Comparable` is not provided, a
- //! compile-time assertion will also be triggered because `T` and `T`
- //! trivially share the common tag `T`, which is the expected behavior.
- //! This design choice aims to provide more flexibility for comparing
- //! objects, while still rejecting usage patterns that are most likely
- //! programming errors.
- //!
- //!
- //! [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_relation#Definition
- //! [2]: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3351.pdf
- //! [3]: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/named_req/EqualityComparable
- //! [4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injective_function
- template <typename T>
- struct Comparable;
- BOOST_HANA_NAMESPACE_END
- #endif // !BOOST_HANA_FWD_CONCEPT_COMPARABLE_HPP
|