RE: [boost] cstdint.hpp: macros; nested namespace

From: Gary Powell (Gary.Powell_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-07 16:31:00

> It seems to me that there is a useful distinction between larger libraries
> 
> and smaller ones.  It makes sense for larger libraries with lots of names 
> to be in a sub-namespace.  But for small libraries, particularly those of
> a 
> very general nature, having a nested namespace doesn't seem like it buys 
> much.  There are also the compiler issues with nested namespaces.
> 
> Of course if you buy those arguments,
> 
I'll buy it. ($0.02)

>  it would mean libraries like the 
> boost graph library should be in a nested namespace.
Most definitely graph should be in its own namespace.

Proposed:
boost:: very general stuff, useful across many domains, with few individual
names. (casting? type conversions?)

boost::libraryName big things like VTL, LL, Graph, python_c++, or things
with likely conflicts, like tuples, integer.hpp, graphics primitives.

boost::libraryName::details things specific to the library and not intended
for general use. (Those things that are separate belong in their own
library.) For a library to be accepted the details can be accepted with the
library and later proposed to be added as stand alone code.

  -gary-

gary.powell_at_[hidden]