Re: [boost] Re: relative includes

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-06 18:23:48

----- Original Message -----
From: "vesa_karvonen" <vesa_karvonen_at_[hidden]>

> --- In boost_at_y..., Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_a...> wrote:
> >I think you are right about the global replace. We should really
> >move to the more correct "boost/..." form, and then document that as
> >the "boost way".
>
> Are you saying that it has finally been acknowledged that the
> #include "boost/..." form is more correct?

That's not under discussion. What's been decided is that #include paths
relative to the #including file rather than a known #include path should be
avoided (e.g. #include "../foo.h", #include "bar.h", etc.)

> Having argued on this
> topic at least twice, I'd like to know what was the deciding argument.

Sorry, I guess you haven't won that argument yet. But don't give up ;-)

-Dave