Re: [boost] [range] naming adl functions

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-15 17:19:51

Daniel Frey wrote:
> Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>> Could we agree on a naming scheme/implementation scheme for the
>> customization-points?
>>
>> I prefer
>>
>>   range_begin()
>>   range_end()
>>   range_size()
>>
>> to
>>
>> boost_range_begin()
>> boost_range_end()
>> boost_range_size()
>>
>> and think these identifiers are unique enough, the small amout of
>> global costomization-points taken into consideration.
>
> I'd like to comment on a more general point than just the names:
>
> If we offer customizations points for a specific library, why should
> we use ADL at all?

You might want to read the recent threads "[serialization] Doc problems",
"[range] How to extend Boost.Range?" and the threads mentioned there.

Jonathan