From: Mark Rodgers (mark.rodgers_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-09-06 02:43:43
> Problem with that is that you end up reserving the names lambda, etc.
> in boost.
> What about boost::detail::lambda, etc.?
> Reserving a namespace name in detail is much less impactful (is that
> a word?)
Umm, I'm not quite sure why. Both reserve the exactly one name in
one of the two namespaces we have currently use - boost and
boost::detail. I would have said both were equally "impactful".
Given there was also a suggestion that boost::random (I think) should
be used as a "protected" namespace (containing stuff used by people
extending the library, but not general users), it seems appropriate
for each library to reserve boost::<library-name>, and then for
truly private stuff to go in boost::<library-name>::detail.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk