Boost logo

Boost :

From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-03 11:45:47

Hash: SHA1

On Monday 03 March 2008 09:09 am, Doug Gregor wrote:
> We didn't think as carefully about header (or namespace) placement
> when the Signals library went into Boost, so there are some
> inconsistencies. visit_each and last_value were reviewed with Signals,
> but went into boost/ (and namespace boost) because they were
> considered to be general mechanisms that could be reused. visit_each,
> for example, needs to be supported by a few other libraries (like
> Bind) to be useful, so it didn't belong in Signals.
> As for boost/signal.hpp: it's in boost/ because boost::signal is in
> namespace boost. In retrospect, I should have put everything in
> namespace boost::signals (and headers in boost/signals), but back in
> 2002 we didn't have quite as much clutter in the top-level boost
> namespace/directory.

thread_safe_signals has a similar header/namespace layout to boost.signals,
since I figured staying as close to the original as possible would ease
acceptance. But perhaps I should rearrange things to be more in line with
current boost policies? And by the way, who do I need to send a campaign
donation to in order to get a review manager? :)

- --
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


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