Re: [boost] [type_traits][general] Best practice for inline namespaces?

Subject: Re: [boost] [type_traits][general] Best practice for inline namespaces?
From: Roland Bock (rbock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-20 05:25:55

On 2015-01-18 18:10, John Maddock wrote:
>> FWIW, I'm using inline namespaces (or emulation in C++03) in Boost.Log,
>> although I don't inject Boost version. Works quite well in detecting
>> configuration mismatch cases, when user's code is compiled in a mode
>> incompatible with the compiled library. I'm not sure how useful this 
>> would be
>> with TypeTraits though, given that the traits are compile-time 
>> constructs and
>> ABI compatibility is not an issue.
>
> I think you may have hit the nail on head there: are inline namespaces 
> of any use for header-only code?
I never really understood their benefits for versioning, but there are 
other uses in header-only code of course. For instance, I like the ones 
for user defined literals, see

http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/chrono/operator%22%22h

Users can pull in these literals into their scope at the granularity of 
their choice due to nested inline namespaces. Very nice, IMHO.