Re: [boost] Formal Review: Indexed Set

From: JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-28 16:57:25

Hi Jeff

----- Mensaje original -----
De: Jeff Garland <jeff_at_[hidden]>
Fecha: Domingo, Marzo 28, 2004 9:25 pm
Asunto: Re: [boost] Formal Review: Indexed Set

> On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 20:09:24 +0200, JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote
> > > > > 2) bidirectional_map
> 
> I have no problem with waiting.  There's no question that on
> my current project there are 5 or 6 places I could have used
> bi-map.  So at the moment it is the one I'd like to see.

Thanx for your patience. I guess in the meantime (some
months) you can get by with the bimap from examples.

> 
> > > > > 5) Naming
[about boost::container::multi_index namespace]
> > Seems to me the general perception is that sooner or
> > later libs will be have to be migrate to the appropriate
> > umbrella namespace; newcomers should do it right away.
> 
> Well, I'm actually not very concerned about the namespace -- it's 
> the 
> directory structure that is a major hassle to fix: CVS, doc 
> pointers, etc.  
> Its possible the other authors of containers won't want to 
> refactor the 
> directory structure.  So I think we want to make sure they are 
> willing to do 
> this at some point before we send you down this path.
> 

At this point, whatever decision involves a manageable
amount of work. So I'll stick with what people like most.
Further changes would be much more painful.

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo