[reSIProcate] removing hash<T*> from HashMap

[Jason Fischl]

I'm ok with removing this. I believe we used it long ago in some application
code but it is something that could be done outside of rutil if needed.
Jason


On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Adam Roach <adam at nostrum.com> wrote:

> For the record, on a cursory examination of the issue, I agree with
> Alan. I'd also like Jason to weigh in on the original purpose of the
> design before we go ripping things out, though.
>
> /a
>
> On 4/23/08 4:45 PM, Alan Hawrylyshen wrote:
> > On 23-Apr-08, at 13:43 , Byron Campen wrote:
> >
> >
> >>      Is anyone using this?
> >>
> >
> >
> > I cannot speak to this, but I've often wondered about the default
> > template implementation and after searching around and concluding that
> > nothing within resiprocate was using it, ignored it. The code falls
> > into the 'dangerous' category if you ask me since it is not only
> > surprising that something would compile, as Bruce points out, the
> > results are incorrect from time to time.
> >
> > I am strongly in favor of removing it if there is no impact to the
> > stack and DUM / repro clients.
> >
> > Thanks
> > A
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
> > https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20080423/a5ad9bae/attachment.htm>