From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-23 18:10:45
At 02:15 PM 4/23/2001, jimh_datagrove_com_at_[hidden] wrote:
>Using the boost scheme of forcing string functions like strlen into
>std breaks existing code that merely includes a boost header.
>I use MSVC, which does not put strlen in std namespace (even using
Microsoft has said that they are fixing that in 7.0.
I suppose this is evil, but is there a good justification
>for "fixing" this at the cost of making it miserable to use boost
>with MSVC code?
Do you have a better workaround? In another message you suggest:
>Boost could instead import functions it wants into its own namespace:
> using ::strlen;
> using std::strlen;
But that penalizes the users of standard conforming compilers, and
continues to impact even one MSVC starts to conform in a few months. Boost
developers often bend over backward to accommodate MSVC, but not at that
kind of cost.
If someone can come up with a better workaround, great! But it shouldn't
be something that has a big impact on users of standard conforming
libraries and compiler, IMO.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk