From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-24 01:13:32
David Abrahams wrote:
> "Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>But you still haven't given me a reason I can understand why it
>>shouldn't be "boost_range_begin()" etc..
> Peter Dimov made some excellent arguments in the thread containing
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.user/9718 (click the
> subject line to see the thread).
It's true he made some excellent arguments in that thread, but this is a
different argument. ;-) Once you accept as a given that we should be
using an ADL customization point, what should we call it?
In this message:
You say: "You're much safer using boost_range_end or range_end if you're
trying to keep it small. I don't see any reason to keep it small,
though: users won't be invoking that function directly."
And I agree, it should be boost_range_end. We are in agreement. Now we
just need to convince Thorsten. :-)
-- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting 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