From: Steve M. Robbins (steven.robbins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-20 16:59:52
On Sat, Jul 20, 2002 at 09:30:51AM -0400, Beman Dawes wrote:
> As has been discussed many times in the past, the C++ standard provides
> #include <...> for "headers" (which are only well-defined in the standard
> for the standard library), and #include "..." for "source files" (which
> includes the Boost header files). See section 16.2.
> For historical reasons relating to problem compilers, Boost code has always
> used <boost/...> instead of "boost/...", and thus relies on
> implementation-defined behavior (16.2/2).
Err, but the search caused by #include "..." is *also* implementation-defined,
according to 16.2/3 of http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/open/n2356/
Am I reading the right document?
> The historical reasons no longer apply. Should we being to transition
> Boost code to the more correct #include "boost/..." form?
I don't know. Will it make any difference in the case that
boost is installed to "system" locations (e.g. /usr/include/boost) on
these problem systems?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk