Subject: Re: [boost] [review] string convert
From: Vicente BOTET (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-07 04:28:30
> Message du 06/05/11 03:01
> De : "Vladimir Batov"
> A : boost_at_[hidden]
> Copie Ã :
> Objet : Re: [boost] [review] string convert
> > Vicente BOTET wanadoo.fr> writes:
> > Well I can see that you use boost::conversion namespace and boost::convert
> > class. So you are using two
> > 'namaspaces'. I don't know if this follows the Boost.rule. In any case it is
> > not quite orthodox.
> > I see that your PImpl proposal defines a class piml which is not even in the
> > boost namespace.
> I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you trying to justify
> particular behavior using some wacky/bad failed proposal as an example? So, for
> 'convert' I created 2 'namespaces' instead of 1. So, what now? As for Pimpl,
> then it's over 4 years old now. If the time comes, I'll re-adjust with the
> spirit of the day.
> Apologies but I find your line of reasoning like "you do this" somewhat immature.
You are right. I should discuss the advantage/liabilities of your proposal independently of how you used namespaces in the past.
> What have you got all jumpy about anyway? I was not fighting anyone. I was not
> criticizing anything. I was only reminding what (I think) Dave Abrahams voiced
> in one of his emails.
Apologies by misunderstanding your purpose.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk