From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-31 01:40:27
Joaqu?n M? L?pez Mu?oz wrote:
>> Yea, nice, except that I probably don't want to add typedefs to a class
>> for the sake of one client. The idea that member<> can be used as tag is
>> really nice.
> A real boon would be the possibility to have string literals as template
> parameters, so that one could write:
> non_unique<tag<"name">,member<employee,std::string,&employee::name> >
> but this is daydreaming AFAIK.
> BTW, tags are optional, you can use numbers if you like it better.
Yes, I know.
>> BTW, I'm not sure this namespace name is good idea. After I wrote
>> "indexed_set" in header name, I'm very likely to type "indexed_set" in
>> namespace name. Maybe, it the file really provides more than one
>> indexed_set, the name can be tweaked?
> First time this issue arose (that I know of) was in Boost.Tuple,
> which uses namespace boost::tuples instead of the expected
> boost::tuple, for the same reasons as here. If someone finally
> finds a way out of this problem, I'd gladly drop the 's'.
You mean, the problem with having both tuple namespace and tuple class? I
never run into it yet, so can't comment.
> I don't understand what you say about the file providing
> more than one indexed_set. Care to explain?
Sure. I thought "indexed_sets" name was used because there's conceptually
more than one indexed_set in the namespace, or because more indexed_sets
are expected in future. I was wrong.
I still don't know how to avoid different name of namespace and header file
-- I believe the confusion is quite possible.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk