Re: [boost] checked_delete.hpp fix

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-25 09:23:24

Daniel Frey wrote:
>
> Any reason why you went for 'boost::' instead of '::boost::' for the
> prefix? IMO only the latter expresses exactly what we want or do we
> rely on user to never create sub-namespaces called 'boost'? Although
> this is not very likely, we shouldn't place any restrictions on users
> that are not needed.

What we want is to disable ADL, any qualification does that. There's really
no practical difference between boost:: and ::boost:: in this case; the user
is not expected to just drop identifiers into boost and expect things to
work. They won't. We aren't required to document all identifiers in boost,
so we reserve the right to not compile if there is a collision.