Re: [boost] random and detail namespace

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-06-28 13:22:53

Matthias Troyer wrote on 6/28/2000 1:24 PM

>Ian Bruntlett wrote:
>> 
>> > Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> >  >I just happened to take a look at the docs for the random library,
>> >  >and the fact that we are documenting things we're putting in the
>> >  >detail namespace hit me like a cold slap in the face ;\
>> >  >
>> >  >I thought detail was supposed to be reserved for implementation
>> >  >details of no interest to users...?
>> 
>> Surely its of interest to people porting the library?
>
>A I see it the templated classes for RNGs in the
>detail namespace are of interest to people 
>implementing additional RNGs, but not to people
>just using the library. A documentation thus
>seems to be appropriate, but maybe we can have it
>separated from the rest of the documentation?

Perhaps those classes should go in boost::additional_rng instead of 
boost::detail?  This seems analgous to private and protected specifiers 
for classes.

Another possibility:

namespace boost
{
     namespace random // or whatever
     {
          // public interface   - document
          // ...
          namespace rng
          {
               // a protected interface  - document
          }
          namespace detail
          {
               // private stuff  - don't document
          }
     }
     using namespace random;
}

(these comments are applicable to more than just random)

-Howard