Re: [boost] [guid] - review results? - inline missing

From: Andy (atompkins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-30 10:09:56

"Gottlob Frege" <gottlobfrege_at_[hidden]> wrote in
news:97ffb310705300624j611e0c54j56b256a127922268_at_[hidden]: 

> On 5/30/07, Oliver.Kowalke_at_[hidden] <Oliver.Kowalke_at_[hidden]>
> wrote: 
>> Hello,
>> some function definitions are missing the inline keyword (sha1.hpp
>> and uuid.hpp).
>> uuid::is_null() will no be renamed to uuid::is_nil() (ask in order to
>> be conform to UUID-RFC)?
>> Oliver
>>
> 
> Personally, I'd stick to null over nil, as null is more the C++
> standard (ie see the new 'null_ptr' that will probably be added to the
> next standard).
> 

I also perfer null, but I am happy to use what this list decides on. 
Maybe both? 

> Tony
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost 
> 
> 

Andy.