From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-29 16:10:46
Stefan Slapeta wrote:
> I wonder if it makes sense to write an additional header for
> boost.bind (and maybe boost.function) that provides the library
> interfaces meeting the 'modern' boost requirements, i.e.:
I'm really not sure what do you mean by "modern" boost requirements.
> a) this header should be placed in the bind subdirectory, e.g.
What purpose does that serve? Why not boost/bind/bind/bind.hpp?
> b) this header should introduce a separate namespace 'bind' or
> 'function' to avoid the well-known namespace clashes with
> boost::lambda that are _really_ annoying.
Again, what purpose would that serve? The only name that bind.hpp "reserves"
in boost is 'bind'. Defining a namespace 'bind' still reserves the same name
in boost, namely, 'bind', except that user code is now uglier.
> c) this header should not declare the placeholders in an anomymous
> namespace. (I don't know what was the intention behind that but it
> makes it impossible to write 'using boost::_1')
The original intent has been to make the placeholders globally available. As
identifiers that start with an underscore are not allowed at the global
namespace, and since defining a variable in a header would cause link
errors, the placeholders have been put in an unnamed namespace.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk