Re: [boost] [RFC] Header/namespace policy draft

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-04 04:33:45

Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Anthony Williams wrote:
>> Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> 
>>> * Non-core libraries may place a single consolidated convenience 
>>>   header in boost/, forwarding to files of the form 
>>>   boost/<libraryname>/<header>.hpp.  Regardless, their documented
>>>   public components are not in boost/ or namespace boost::
>> 
>> What about boost.thread? Though the "general use" header is boost/thread.hpp,
>> and the other headers are in boost/thread/xyz.hpp, the public interface is and
>> always has been in namespace boost::, and changing this now would be a
>> breaking change.
>
> Seems that if thread is a non-core library then it indeed breaks the
> "standard practice". I don't think a breaking change is a good idea
> though. I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> also writes:

> Yes, I agree that
> everything that is supposed to be proposed for inclusion into the
> standard library should be at the "core". 

That includes boost.thread. I'll leave things alone for now.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Williams
Just Software Solutions Ltd - http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk
Registered in England, Company Number 5478976.
Registered Office: 15 Carrallack Mews, St Just, Cornwall, TR19 7UL