Boost logo

Boost :

From: Lois Goldthwaite (loisg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-03-17 04:54:53

For classes in the standard library, wouldn't this have to be provided by the
library implementors? Because they are allowed to add additional defaulted
parameters to standard functions, or to provide additional functions with fewer
parameters in lieu of defaulted arguments, a user could never be certain what
the proper forward declarations would be. Or did you mean only that boost
headers should have a companion <*fwd> counterpart?


Kevlin Henney wrote:

> It seems that one of the most common requests concerning the standard
> headers is whether there are forward declaring headers for <string>,
> <vector>, etc as there is for <ios>.
> What does the list think about establishing this as a practice for Boost
> headers? Setting a precedent by defining headers with significant
> template content and/or dependencies to have a <*fwd> counterpart?
> ____________________________________________________________
> Kevlin Henney Curbralan Ltd
> kevlin_at_[hidden] +44 (0) 7801 073 508
> ____________________________________________________________
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get $50 free postage.
> Print postage from your PC with E-Stamp.
> Click here to sign up.
> -- Talk to your group with your own voice!
> --

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at