Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] namespace boost?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-18 13:15:14


AMDG

On 1/18/2011 9:50 AM, Stewart, Robert wrote:
> Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> This is true, but I don't want to encourage a proliferation of
>> files with the same name (in different directories). That
>> will just make development harder. I can't help but think
>> that those against boost/library_name.hpp are focusing so hard
>> on purity that they're ignoring convenience. It should be
>> _trivial_ for people to get started with a boost library, and
>> #include<boost/library_name/library_name.hpp> makes a bad
>> first impression, IMO.
>
> For the person just starting with a Boost library, boost/library_name.hpp is the way to go (I wasn't suggesting not having that file). If that includes boost/library_name/all.hpp, then once boost/library_name.hpp exists, it will never change so library_name's developer need never worry about it again.
>
> I wasn't commenting on the wisdom of boost/configurator/configurator.hpp, though I agree that the redundancy is unfortunate. However, if there's no other include file in boost/configurator, what name should it have?
>

How about we just say that a library should reserve
a single name under boost and how it uses it is up
to the library author (i.e. a single header, a directory,
or a directory + header are all fine.). If we're
just trying to keep the top-level boost from getting
cluttered, there's no reason to overspecify the
solution.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk