From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-29 01:46:21
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
> Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>> Okay, if there are no objections, this is what I'll do.
> This didn't come out quite right -- I know that Daryle has objected.
> I guess I mean: given the fact that the namespace-directory convention has
> already been widely violated, if there are no further objections I'll keep the
> library in the iostreams directory but use the io namespace.
I didn't see the whole thread, but we ought to try to avoid violating
the convention any more than it has been. As Boost grows, this becomes
more important. What's wrong with a namespace boost::iostreams? You
can always introduce an alias for backward compatibility.
-- 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