Re: [boost] [endian] Updated version available in the file vault

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-30 11:52:51

Neil Mayhew wrote:
> On 2008-05-26 05:22, Beman Dawes wrote:
>> There's an updated version available in the file vault. Changes include:
>>
>> * Use of namespaces to simulate C++0x scoped enums.
>> * Addition of operator= for improved efficiency.
>> * Updated docs, including new FAQ entries.
>> * Jamfile.v2 added.
>>
>> See http://tinyurl.com/4bswsh
>>
>> Does this look ready for formal review? Comments appreciated!
>>   
> 
> The 0.8 version looks good to me, except for two things:
> 
> 1. As I commented earlier about the name:
> 
>> ... there is already an endian.hpp elsewhere in boost and I think it 
>> would be easy for people to miss this endian, and never discover its 
>> functionality.
> 
> When I was searching to see if boost had something like this, the great 
> majority of the hits were for the existing boost/detail/endian.hpp, 
> which wasn't what I was hoping for. It doesn't seem good to me to have 
> two headers in boost with the same file name, even if they are in 
> different directories. The only good solution I can see is to rename 
> detail/endian.hpp to detail/endianness.hpp, which is more descriptive, 
> IMHO, but would probably break a lot of existing client code. Although 
> maybe clients include detail/ headers at their own risk?

Use of detail/ headers is certainly "at-your-own-risk".

My quick take on detail/endian.hpp is that it should be moved to 
boost/config/platform, but John Maddock is the config maintainer so that 
would be his call.

As far as boost/integer/endian.hpp goes, I plan to stick with that name.

> 2. As mentioned in other posts, the implementation of operators using 
> <boost/operators.hpp> needs to be reconsidered.

Yes. On my do list.

> Thanks, Beman, for your work in getting this moving again.

Thank you and everyone else responding to this thread for all your ideas 
and suggestions!

--Beman