Boost logo

Boost :

From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-06 13:06:16

"John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> wrote

> > This kind of unnamed namespace can be handled correctly by both MS
> > compilers, with respect to pch, but I don't believe it satisfies the
> > Boost naming convention. OTOH, if no other solution is found, this
> > is the only
> > way we can achieve typeof compliance with pch, while still staying in
> > the unnamed namespace.
> I'm surprised the any kind of unnamed namespace can be handled by PCH's:
> after all each TU should get it's own distict name for the unnamed
> namespace.

I don't know much about how this is done, but I think PCH stores the state
of the compiler, so it should be possible to leave some unknowns in this
state, such as namespace name, to resolve later. But again, I am just

In any case, if you do somehing like this in PCH:

namespace a { namespace {
    template<class T> struct foo {};

and then, outside PCH:

namespace a { namespace {
    template<> struct foo<int> {};

the compiler (7.1, 8.0) will complain.

If, OTOH, you use:

namespace { namespace a {

everything seems to compile fine.

(I don't know how other compilers handle this problem, though)


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at