Re: [boost] Curiousity question

Subject: Re: [boost] Curiousity question
From: Damian Meden (damian.meden_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-31 20:26:03

On Monday, October 31, 2016, Sylvester-Bradley, Gareth <
Gareth.Sylvester-Bradley_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Hi Edward,
>
> On 29 October 2016 19:35, Edward Diener wrote:
> > On 10/13/2016 12:50 PM, Sylvester-Bradley, Gareth wrote:
> > > Your test has "using namespace cxxd_bind_ns::placeholders;" (
> https://github.com/eldiener/cxx_dual/blob/master/test/test_bind.cpp#L38).
> > > If you omitted this, and changed the uses of _1, _2, to
> cxxd_bind_ns::placeholders::_1, cxxd_bind_ns::placeholders::_2, I think
> you'd discover you've not mapped the Boost placeholders.
> >
> > As I originally replied I did not map the placeholders nested namespace
> for the bind dual library.
> > But you are wrong in your assumption above.
> > CXXD works perfectly well with the cxxd_bind_ns::placeholders::_n
> notation. There is no problem
> > in C++ using a nested namespace for a namespace alias that is set to the
> namespace in which the
> > nested namespace resides.
>
> I knew that. But I didn't think Boost's placeholders were in
> boost::placeholders.
> They weren't as of 1.59.0, but it turns out I'd missed
> https://github.com/boostorg/bind/commit/db56733e4ed2125944b89e01cf36a9
> e451dd36f5
> So I'm sorry, I was out of date.
>
> Best regards,
> Gareth
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/
> mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>