From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-03 02:30:36
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| 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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk