From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-02 19:37:33
I was just looking at using Boost.Range in my new Sequence library and
noticed the following:
1. The documentation of requirements uses names like range_iterator
without qualification. You need to add the boost:: prefix or
make it very clear that all names are implicitly boost:: prefixed
(as opposed to, say, boost::range:: prefixed). I prefer the
former; people may land on the documentation for reference
without reading all the introductory material.
2. Names like range_iterator in the requirements tables should be
hyperlinked to some documentation for them.
3. The documentation you land on should clearly state in which
header those names can be found.
4. Having a pile of names prefixed by "range_" (like
boost::range_const_iterator) just seems wrong to me when we have
namespaces. Is there a good reason we're not using
boost::range::const_iterator or boost::ranges::const_iterator?
-- Dave Abrahams 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