Re: [boost] Boost policy for putting headers in boost/ Was: #3541 Support <boost/ptr_map.hpp>

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost policy for putting headers in boost/ Was: #3541 Support <boost/ptr_map.hpp>
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-23 13:39:05

Stewart, Robert wrote:
> vicente.botet wrote:
>> I think the main problem with standardizing
>> boost/<lib>/all.hpp  is could clash with a feature named all
>> for a particular domain.
> 
> Aside from my not envisioning anything named "all" being useful, your argument is reasonable.
> 
> If "all" is considered too inclusive, as Eric suggests, then another name is possible.
> How about "_"? Is "_.hpp" legal in all supported filesystems? Since we're talking about
> libraries, and not applications, how about "main.hpp?" "main" is still very short and
> would be consistent.

To be honest, I find the lib/main.hpp idea not bad at all (except for the
extra typing involved vs. lib.hpp). However, following existing practice,
and not breaking existing code, IMO, far outweigh the problem you
have with tab completion: that can never be a valid rationale for breaking
existing code. Fusion simply follows existing practice and extends it to
the next level of modularity. There were two existing practice at the
time when I wrote fusion:

     lib/
     lib.hpp

and

     lib/
     lib/lib.hpp

I find the latter redundant. I chose to follow the first.

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boostpro.com
http://spirit.sf.net
http://www.facebook.com/djowel
Meet me at BoostCon
http://www.boostcon.com/home
http://www.facebook.com/boostcon