Boost logo

Boost :

From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-04 13:06:23

"Thomas Witt" <witt_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
| > Dear all,
| >
| > Have anybody any last objections to breaking changes to boost.range:
| >
| > boost::range_iterator<T>::type
| >
| > becomes
| >
| > boost::range::iterator<T>::type
| >
| > and so forth. All code that relies on
| > ADL inside the range library by overloading the functions begin() etc
| > will need to be renamed range_begin() etc.
| Sorry I was unresponsive for a few days but I was travelling. I still
| think this is the wrong way to do it. One reason is that it requires
| every library X that wants to interface with the range lib to uglify its
| interface by the range_ prefix.

yes, but in return the library only has two provide one overload
of begin/end.

|AFAICS there are two ways out of this
| a) X provides the unprefixed begin as well.

how does that solve anything?

| b) X requires the use of boost.range in order to have a "natural" interface
| I really think this is bad.

a) or b) ?

| If we want to have adl wrappers

what is an ADL wrapper?


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