on Mon Dec 03 2007, Andrey Semashev <andysem-AT-mail.ru> wrote:
Joel de Guzman wrote:
Anthony Williams wrote:
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
* Non-core libraries may place a single consolidated convenience header in boost/, forwarding to files of the form boost/<libraryname>/<header>.hpp. Regardless, their documented public components are not in boost/ or namespace boost:: What about boost.thread? Though the "general use" header is boost/thread.hpp, and the other headers are in boost/thread/xyz.hpp, the public interface is and always has been in namespace boost::, and changing this now would be a breaking change.
Seems that if thread is a non-core library then it indeed breaks the "standard practice". I don't think a breaking change is a good idea though. I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this.
Maybe the library should reside in its own sub-namespace and then this namespace should be imported into boost:: with using directive. This import would be optional, depending on some macro, and would be declared deprecated.
More simply, boost/thread.hpp could do #include "boost/thread/whatever.hpp" #include "boost/thread/whateverelse.hpp" namespace boost { using namespace threads; } -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com