Re: [Boost-users] [Lambda] Handling Bind/Lambda name clashes.

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Lambda] Handling Bind/Lambda name clashes.
From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-25 07:49:46

(fixing attribution...)

On 5/23/2011 11:42 PM, Robert Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
>> At some point in time, Eric Niebler wrote: 
>>>         And what is wrong with leaving bind in the boost namespace as I was
>>>         suggesting and define boost::function like this:
>>> 
>>>           namespace boost {
>>>             namespace function_adl_block {
>>>               template<class Sig>
>>>               struct function {...};
>>>             }
>>>             using function_adl_block::function;
>>>           }
>>> 
>>>         Now the "boost" namespace is no longer associated with
>>>         boost::function,
>>>         and boost::bind won't be found by ADL. Unless I'm mistaken, and
>>>         a quick
>>>         test with comeauonline suggests I'm not. But Steven and Peter are
>>>         usually right about this stuff, so I'll patiently wait to be
>>>         corrected
>>>         and learn. :-)
>> 
>>     Yes, you're correct about this.
> 
> Ok, this seems to be a resolution to the issue. How about this change,
> and is there
> anyone of greater boosty skills than me who'd do it? 

I have nothing against this change (obviously, since I suggested it).
And it probably wouldn't require a great deal of "boosty skill," either.
I say try it and see what breaks. :-)

It's probably a good general policy to move most/all types in Boost into
ADL-blocking namespaces like above, except those for which there is
reason to keep boost as an associated namespace. Of course, that's a big
job and I don't volunteer, but would it pay to have this as a documented
library development guideline?

-- 
Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com