Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost policy for putting headers in boost/ Was: #3541 Support <boost/ptr_map.hpp>
From: Christopher Jefferson (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-23 11:34:14

On 23 Oct 2009, at 16:04, Stewart, Robert wrote:

> Christopher Jefferson wrote:
>> On 23 Oct 2009, at 15:41, Stewart, Robert wrote:
>>> troy d. straszheim wrote:
>>>> % ls boost/fusion
>>>> adapted/ container.hpp iterator.hpp support/ view.hpp
>>>> adapted.hpp functional/ mpl/ support.hpp
>>>> algorithm/ functional.hpp mpl.hpp tuple/
>>>> algorithm.hpp include/ sequence/ tuple.hpp
>>>> container/ iterator/ sequence.hpp view/
>>> I find navigating such directory structures needlessly annoying: I
>>> can't use filename completion easily. With all.hpp, the directory
>>> name completes, with a trailing "/", and then I can type "all" and
>>> complete that. (Yes, I can get completion up to the "/" or "." and
>>> then type whichever I want to complete the header name or navigate
>>> into the subdirectory, but the partial completion can also mean that
>>> there are other files that begin with what I typed. I can't
>>> navigate as easily unless I already know the directory contents.)
>> I very rarely tab-complete header file names, and I suspect most
>> users
> Your usage patterns are limited to your coworkers and your
> environment. Mine suggests that there are a great many people who
> use tab completion constantly.

Out of interest, why do you assume I only know about my coworkers and
environment, whereas you know about a great many people who are
annoyed by tab completion failing? I don't think the majority of boost
users would ever look inside the boost include directory from the
command line, any more than they would look at their standard
library's headers.

> Consequently, we can't favor one over the other if a neutral
> solution is possible.

What is the neutral solution?


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