From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-19 10:34:30
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 14:56:54 -0500, "William E. Kempf"
>> >> >Gennaro Prota wrote:
>> >> Ooops... there was a misunderstanding. I was thinking of macros that
>> >> don't simply expand to function names, which presumably was what
>> >> William had in mind too (otherwise why raising the problem of the
>> >> scope resolution operator?)
>> >No, I was referring to both types. I believe the why was illustrated in
>> >another post. Even something as simple as SearchPath being defined to
>> >SearchPathA and SearchPathW can lead to problems that namespaces can't
>> I still think there's some misunderstanding. I meant that, in that
>> case, it would be ok to write :: SearchPath.
>Yes, but my comment was about the philosophy of what "::" meant with regards
>to the Win32 API, not with what the result will typically be.
Aaahh!! Why didn't you say it before? :-)
Well, in that case I think it boils down to weigh that possible 'con'
with the 'pros' we have already enumerated.
Up to Mr. Dawes...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk