From: Matthew Austern (austern_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-29 17:23:03
Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 01:24 PM 1/29/2001 -0800, Matthew Austern wrote:
> >My feeling is that at present, the leading candidate for a library
> >would be relaxing the restriction on user overloads within namespace std.
> Matt (or others), please refresh my memory. What is the objection to that
I don't think that anyone has come up with any specific objection
to it. A number of people (including me) find it somewhat distastful,
and suspect that this is a drastic enough change so that there is a
risk of some problem we haven't yet seen.
But the longer we go without anyone coming up with a specific
objection, the less that risk seems. Distasteful as it may be, I
suspect that this is what we'll end up doing unless someone comes
up with a good counterargument or a good pure-library alternative.
At this point, the ball is clearly in LWG's court. I encourage
people who care about this issue to discuss it on the -lib reflector.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk