Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Ping to the admins (was Re: Boost.Operators issue: polluting namespace of caller through argument-dependent lookup)
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-17 13:05:24

On 2016-02-17 20:57, Daniel Frey wrote:
> On the topic of fixing the issue reported: I realize that
> is_chained_base is actually a PITA when you try to add another
> namespace around the operator templates. I’ll have to think of a
> solution. Just a heads up for others: is_chained_base was placed in
> ::boost, not ::boost::detail. I assume this is an oversight as the
> documentation does not mention it and a comment in the source is
> implying that it should actually should have been placed in
> ::boost::detail. If anyone ever used it as part of the public
> interface, please speak up now! :)

Not sure about the purpose of is_chained_base, but might I suggest avoid
moving it into boost::detail. Bringing in 'boost::detail' into ADL is
almost as bad as bringing in 'boost'. This also concerns other types
that are used in template parameters of operator base classes.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at