From: Thorsten Ottosen (tottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-03 05:28:32
Shunsuke Sogame wrote:
> Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>>>I read the long discussion why 'boost_range_begin' was born.
>>>Did I overlook another discussion about the birth of 'range_begin'?
>>maybe, there was some discussion about the problems of tying
>>a concept to a library name. the range concept exists out-side of boost
>>and any type T conforms to it if it implements range_begin(T&) and
> Where the range concept belongs? "Global"?
yep, in the sense that customization points are not tied to
a particular library.
> I'm maybe an worrier, struggling with ADL invasions.
> But short names conflict.
true, that is why begin()/end() were abadened.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk