From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-06 20:46:38
"Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Yes, I used _1, _2, _3 for a long time. I abandoned it because of name
> conflicts with the identically-named placeholders from other boost
> libraries. I picked s1, s2, ... for two reasons:
> 1) The "s" in "s1" stands for "sub-match", which is what these thigs
> 2) s1 kind of looks like $1, which is the perl equivalent.
> That said, I'm open to suggestions for avoiding the name conflicts. I
> would consider switching back to _1 _2 _3 if the technical problems
> were overcome and if people liked it better.
FWIW, The bind library placeholders are going to be moved out of the
unnamed namespace soon, unless Peter has changed his mind.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk