Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Evolution
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-08 17:17:30

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stewart, Robert" <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 9:49 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Evolution

> vicente.botet wrote:
>> 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?

There could be a conflict with other detail namespaces if the user adds

using namespace boost;
using namespace boost::ratios;

It seems more unlikely that other libraries use ratios_detail as namespace, isn't it?
I've seen that a lot of libraries uses detail namespace and others lib_detail. I think that I will move all my uses of detail to lib_detail.


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