Re: [boost] Re: [function types] Formal Review begins today.

From: Jody Hagins (jody-boost-011304_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-08 11:33:26

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 16:06:17 +0200
Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I did document them "just in case", because there might be some
> corner-cases in  which their use is more efficient or convenient. It
> seems safe to remove them  from the documentation to me ITM, but I
> want to think some more about it before  doing so. Another option
> could be to move their description to a comment in the  header.
> 
> If they are kept, however, I see the documentation should be changed
> to make a  very clear recommendation not to use them, unless having
> good reasons.
> 

I think the question is not of whether they should be documented, but
whether they should be exposed.  If they are exposed, then they should
be documented.  If you do not want them to be used, then protect them,
or put them in the detail namespace.

On what is necessary to leave as a viable user interface, only use will
really tell.  I have found it much easier to broaden a restricted
interface than the inverse (mostly because once you provide the
interface, someone is bound to use it, if for no other reason than it
exists).