Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Evolution
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-08 15:49:24
> From: "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]>
> > I'm somewhat confused about "detail". If it's an
> > implemenation detail
> > of a particular library it should be in that library.
> +1, and I this that the name space should be prefixed by the
> name of the library as ratio::ratio_detail.
Why not boost::ratio::detail? Why part namespace, part prefix?
When I raised the issue with Boost.Ratio, the problem was you used boost::detail and I was concerned with cluttering that widely used namespace. If you had a boost::ratio namespace, then boost::ratio::detail would work. However, because your class template is boost::ratio<>, you can't have a boost::ratio namespace. You could have one named boost::ratios, so boost::ratios::detail would work.
Is that a reasonable pattern to require for future/refactored libraries?
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk