[boost] standard implementation detail namespace

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-12-15 12:53:50

I would imagine that little implementation namespaces are (or soon will 
be) common in boost libraries.  Namespace aware browsers might have the 
ability to hide and show, based on a namespace name.  Instead of 
presenting a zillion little implementation detail namespaces to such a 
browser, how 'bout if boost libraries standardize on a common 
"implementation detail" namespace.  Then it would be easy for the user of 
a namespace aware browser to "show boost", but hide "boost::details".

Assuming this is a good idea, here are a few suggested names for this 
nested namespace:

1.  boost_implementation
2.  implementation
3.  imp
4.  details
5.  rel_ops

I think 1 and 2 are too long, making it too hard to read the 
implementation of a boost lib.  3 is a little short and ambiguous.  I 
like 4 the best.  But I think 5 is really funny.  We all know how 
effectively std::rel_ops hides its contents from client code! :-)

Beman Dawes wrote on 12/15/99 11:53 AM
>Interesting idea!
>
>boost::details looks good to me, but, hey, rel_ops has a long and
>[in]glorious history:-)
>
>Howard, you might want to repost your idea as a separate thread, so
>people who are skipping the call_traits/type_traits discussion won't
>miss it.

-Howard