Boost logo

Boost :

From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-07 04:46:40


"Tobias Schwinger" <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> wrote

> Jeff Flinn wrote:
> > Tobias Schwinger wrote:
> >
> >>Arkadiy Vertleyb 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.
> >>>
> >>>Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>
> >>MPL introduces a namespace called "::mpl_" (note: root namespace) by
> >
> >
> > FYI: IIRC, there was a recent post where explicit leading "::" in
refering
> > to namespaces caused problems in atleast one compiler.
>
> Actually I thought I'd be talking to human beings rather than a compiler,
here ;-).

:-)

FWIW, I don't think we need this for typeof. All we need is to define some
templates in, for example, <unnamed>::boost_typeof, and then refer to them
as boost_typeof::blah. No leading "::" is needed.

At least for Microsoft. Does anybody know if the similar problem exists in
other compilers?

Regards,
Arkadiy


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk