From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-09-24 07:45:50
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Maddock" <John_Maddock_at_[hidden]>
> Dave, I get a surprising amount of feedback about those POSIX API's, more
> than about the templates sadly :-(
> I guess most are either migrating from another library or are converting
> existing app from narrow to wide characters, others just want to use API's
> that are part of some standard.
> I take your point about including both headers - but I don't really think
> anyone should be doing that - it sounds like a recipe for disaster (cf
> including both boost/stdint.h and a vendor supplied header), what they
> should be able to do though is write code that uses the standard names and
> switch from one regex implementation to another just by changing the
> include directories. To put it another way, if you call a POSIX standard
> API shouldn't you pass POSIX standard constants to it as required? I
> that there is the namespace issue that makes it non-standard in C++ mode
> (unless you include via <boost/regex.h>), but I would rather see it at
> least half way protected by a namespace than not at all.
I don't see how you could get into trouble by putting the uppercase names in
boost/regex.h, but I don't have a strong position on this.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk