From: Maximilian Wilson (wilson.max_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-21 10:38:08
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:33:26 -0400, Miro Jurisic <macdev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> In article <ciieha$70o$1_at_[hidden]>,
> "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Also, types ending in _t tend to be reserved for typedefs of fundamental
> > types
> All identifiers ending with _t are reserved by POSIX. Unless you are a part of a
> language or library standard that is part of POSIX (which boost isn't), you
> should stay away from all such identifiers.
(?) I thought that's what namespaces were for. Is the _t reservation a
C equivalent of a reserved namespace? If POSIX defines _t macros I
guess namespaces won't help, but if not why do we need to reserve _t
names for POSIX use?
-- Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant. They make a desert and call it peace. -Tacitus
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk