Boost logo

Boost :

From: Eric Woodruff (Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-30 10:47:28

In any case, the user must adopt a standard of usage, such that they do not
allow both <numeric.hpp> and <boost/numeric.hpp>. Documentation can
certainly influence their decision in adopting that standard. (Not to
mention the fact that by default, boost is installed in places like
/usr/include/boost making <boost/numeric.hpp> the preferred and
convenient/automatic usage. In this case, it only hurts you to deviate from
that standard.)

I can however see an argument for a boost/numeric library that is meant to
replace <numeric> by providing some bugfix or better/more
advanced/convenient usage as a direct extension of the standard. If such a
library deserves name reservation, then the current boost/numeric violates
that reservation.

"Neal D. Becker" <nbecker_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> It *is* a problem to have an identical name, because someone could use
> -I blah and get a very unexpected result.
> Having a name identical except for some suffix is not a problem for a
> machine, but still may confuse humans.
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at