Re: [boost] [qvm] Terseness of syntax etc.

Subject: Re: [boost] [qvm] Terseness of syntax etc.
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-12-10 15:12:07

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Sam Kellett <samkellett_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> what namespace is your comma operator in? it could be placed in an extra
> namespace which users can explicitly pull in if they prefer the super
> compact (albeit controversial) syntax and then anybody else could stick
> with a normal free function (like my swizzle(v, xy) above) which would be
> in the normal qvm namespace
>

Yes, all QVM names are safely defined in namespaces.

It's usually fine to bring the entire qvm namespace into whatever namespace
you want, though this includes both types and operations and it is possible
to get ambiguities if you have another *type* by the same name, e.g. mat or
vec.

If that is a problem, you can bring in just boost::qvm::sfinae, which
contains only operations. This should never lead to any ambiguities or
clashes.

Emil