Boost logo

Geometry :

Subject: [ggl] namespaces, models and algorithms
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz)
Date: 2010-12-16 05:58:58

On 16/12/10 10:49, Barend Gehrels wrote:
>> I actually think Hartmut has a point. boost::geometry::traits does not
>> suggest it's an implementation detail, and I'd bet users may want
>> to use
>> them. I'd move all details down in to boost::geometry::detail::,
>> namely boost::geometry::detail::traits,
>> boost::geometry::detail::dispatch
>> The namespace geometry::traits does look pretty public to me. Isn't it
>> there for the user to specialize things?
> Sure, it is traits is also public indeed.
> Maybe I should have distinguished between:
> - library users using already adapted geometries (only using
> boost::geometry:: and boost::geometry::model:: (and cs::) )
> - library users adapting their own geometries (also using
> boost::geometry::traits)

Make sense to me. I've actually been considering the traits
as mixed private and public stuff, wasn't clear to me.
Now it is.

>> I think traits should not go into details, unless I wasn't suppose to
>> specialize these traits, and should have achieved my goal some other
>> way...
> I do strongly agree that traits should not go into details.


Best regards,

Mateusz Loskot,
Charter Member of OSGeo,
Member of ACCU,

Geometry list run by mateusz at