We don't allow relational comparisons of pointers to members.

In which way is that "not clean"? There are a few more situations where comparing pointers is unspecified, and comparing function pointers is just one special case. Apparently, the right result falls out from the rules, so we're good.

@jensmaurer The pointer to object case is reasonable - we define right above here what it means to compare those, and specifies a clear partial ordering.

For the pointer to function case, we never even talk about what greater means. So I have to understand that I have to skip over the "Otherwise, if a pointer p compares greater than a pointer q" by way of p can't compare greater than a because we never say what that means. It's like solving a logic puzzle to figure out what the rules are...

Editorial meeting: Call out pointers to functions explicitly (as unspecified).