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

At Wed, 06 Apr 2011 02:41:45 +0700, Eric Niebler wrote:

On 4/5/2011 10:46 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:

...

Robert Jones wrote:

...

...

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:

using boost::lambda::bind;

should be a better choice.

Hello Peter

Yes, that was my first thought too. But this code still has ambiguity issues.

Yes, you're right, it has. Since boost::function is in namespace boost, the compiler still finds boost::bind via argument-dependent lookup.

Yuk. Is it ever desirable for an argument of type boost::function to cause lookup in namespace boost? Probably not, right? That would argue for moving boost::function into an ADL-blocker namespace.

And perhaps boost::bind and its placeholders should also be in an ADL-blocker namespace, but I seem to recall that the placeholders are not in any namespace for legacy reasons, is that right?

At this point, if such legacy compilers need to be supported, perhaps it makes sense to put the placeholders in a namespace conditionally, for all the other compilers? I wonder if it would be a good idea to have a Boost-wide policy that says something like, Librarry interfaces should not be compromised in any way for compilers shipped more than 10 years ago/not supported by their manufacturer/<appropriate other criterion here> -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com