Re: [boost] Coding guidelines - comments

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-05 16:42:02

At 11:02 AM 7/5/2001, David Abrahams wrote:
 >
 >----- Original Message -----
 >From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
 >
 >> Anyhow, we should probably globally change to #include "..."
 >
 >Perhaps so.
 >
 >> That is the correct form for all non-standard library includes, and 
Boost
 >> should be using it.
 >
 >Where do you get your definition of "correct" in this case?
 >I am just wondering, because the issue is far from clear to me. Peter 
Dimov
 >and Toon Knapen made some good arguments for <>.

Using #include<...> relies on unspecified behavior.  16.2 paragraph 2 
(which supplies semantics for #include <...>) applies only to a "header", 
which in 1.4 paragraph 5 is defined as a standard library header.  It 
doesn't apply to user included source files.

Thus using #include <...> isn't guaranteed to find user files.

It took me years to understand this is what folks are talking about when 
they say that <...> should be reserved for standard library headers.  I was 
so used to thinking that the term "header" applied to both system and user 
files, that I completely failed to understand the arguments of those who 
said it didn't.

(Actually, I think the standard is unclear. Take a look at 16.2 paragraph 2 
and tell me if you think "header" applies to both std lib and user 
includes.  I'll file a defect report if others agree that 16.2 para 2 is 
unclear.)

--Beman