Boost logo

Boost :

From: Stefan Slapeta (stefan_nospam__at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-29 16:40:43

Peter Dimov wrote:

> I'm really not sure what do you mean by "modern" boost requirements.

None of the libraries that have recently been included into boost placed
their headers in the boost root directory. I don't know whether this has
become a (formal) requirement but that's what I wanted to express.

>> a) this header should be placed in the bind subdirectory, e.g.
>> boost/bind/bind.hpp
> What purpose does that serve? Why not boost/bind/bind/bind.hpp?

It was just an idea how to separate this header from the existing. One
of many possible.

>> 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.

Try to include boost/bind.hpp and boost/lambda/bind.hpp at the same time
(just for matters of uniformity: this is the first time where I don't
agree that one of those includes is in a subdirectory and the other is not!)
I've not found any solution for how to use e.g. _1 from boost.lambda in
one function and _1 from boost.bind in another _without_ having to
qualify these two everytime, which is totally ugly IMO.

> 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.

ah ... I understand. IIRC, the _1 from boost.lamba are types and don't
have these problems therefore.
This means more or less that I'll never be able to write 'using
boost::_1', no?


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at