Traits in `std::cmp` and mathematical terminology

[jbe]

@steffahn

I doubt that's intentional

But the missing axiom isn't required to make PartialOrd (in regard to <) a partial order, right?

@steffahn

I.e. the fix is either to add an axiom like " a == b and b < c and c == d implies a < d ", or to require that <= is transitive.

What exactly would be fixed? It still doesn't make <= act according to a non-strict partial order.

@steffahn

Which is funny because once you require that <= is transitive, a bunch of other stuff (i.e. everything that doesn't just specify how different methods are supposed to be defined in terms of each other) technically becomes really entirely redundant.

Is the opposite also true? That the "bunch of other stuff" assures that <= is transitive?

So if I understand it right (really not sure if I do), we could either demand <= being transitive or keep the (then redudant) other demands?

P.S.: I can also check myself later. This was just a quick response. I should rather be going to sleep

… 5 hours later