Re: cout << vector<string>

From:

Maxim Yegorushkin <maxim.yegorushkin@gmail.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:03:41 -0800 (PST)

Message-ID:

<4e126065-e692-4158-859e-ff4204a3cd52@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com>

On Nov 11, 1:54 pm, Maxim Yegorushkin <maxim.yegorush...@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Nov 11, 11:20 am, Hendrik Schober <spamt...@gmx.de> wrote:

[]

  Having followed this whole battle of words, I wonder what's
  wrong with putting this operator into the global namespace
  and altogether avoiding the hassle of having to know about
  things you're not supposed to know about?

Nothing wrong and this is indeed the correct way to do so. I confused
this case with another one, sincere apologies.

This what I was confusing it with:

    #include <map>
    #include <iostream>
    #include <iterator>

    // should be in namespace std::
    template<class T, class U>
    std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& s, std::pair<T, U> const&
p)
    {
        return s << p.first << ' ' << p.second;
    }

    int main()
    {
        typedef std::map<int, int> Map;
        Map m;
        std::copy(
              m.begin()
            , m.end()
            , std::ostream_iterator<Map::value_type>(std::cout)
            );
    }

It won't compile unless operator<<(std::ostream& s, std::pair<T, U>
const& p) is in namespace std.

--
Max