Re: boost.url review

From: Vinnie Falco (vinnie.falco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-08-17 18:17:18

On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 11:12 AM Andrzej Krzemienski <akrzemi1_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Maybe an alternative would be to keep them in the public API but give
> them a separate namespace, like `urls::encoding`. This would indicate
> more clearly that you have a relatively separate sub-library there,
> that needs to stay for logistic reasons.

Yes that is precisely the design choice that we made, that namespace
is `boost::urls::grammar`

Thanks