Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Operators and make_shared
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-07-12 13:23:59
On Friday 12 July 2013 17:13:39 Andrew Ho wrote:
> Agreed, boost operators classes should be in boost::operators. I'm working
> on a patch to fix this issue (have already done so in my test code for
> operators2 and it works just fine).
Could we just have boost::operators (i.e. without 2)? The old implementation
didn't have a namespace and the new one is supposed to replace it, isn't it?
> There's also a macro flag in boost operators BOOST_NO_OPERATORS_IN_NAMESPACE
> which allows boost operators classes to be in the global namespace. I
> propose we get rid of this macro and force all operators classes to be in
> the boost::operators2 namespace.
I don't mind against that. I'm curious though for what compilers this
workaround is targeted for. I'm guessing this should be something rather old.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk