[boost] Re: [Range] issues

From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-03 02:30:36

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:uekcpcfg2.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
|
| 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.

yeah, good idea.

|  3. The documentation you land on should clearly state in which
|     header those names can be found.

there is a header section.

|  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?

decision made in review or post-review. people like it that way.

-Thorsten