Re: [boost] Re: date_time naming

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-04 08:04:10

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:20:50 -0400, David Abrahams wrote
> >> Disable the macros where neccessary?  You can do it temporarily and
> >> provide an alias typedef.
> >
> > But what other code would that break if you disable the macro?  
> 
> None.  When you find the nonconforming platform, you find the
> definition of time, and
> 
> #ifdef time
> # undef time
> #endif
> 
>    ... // boost date_time contents
> 
>    typedef time time_;
> 
> #ifdef WHATEVER_PLATFORM && !defined(BOOST_DATE_TIME_UNDEF_TIME)
> # define time  ... // old definition of time
> #endif

So on the non-conforming platform users have to write time_?  This seems like
an awful lot of work when you can just say

typedef boost::posix_time::ptime time;
 
> > It's been so long that I can't even remember which platform, but
> > these seems like opening a Can-O-Big-Worms....
> 
> It's a principle of Boost to avoid compromising interfaces just to
> accomodate a broken compiler.

Sure I agree with that.  Especially for anything that is going to be
standardized.  OTH, there will be other time types in the future (ex:
local_time, gps_time) so everything can't be named 'time' anyway.  

Jeff