Fixed. On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj@gmail.com> wrote:
AMDG
Ross Levine wrote:
I sent Jens an email just now.
I have a style questions as well. First of all, this new poisson_distribution is policy-based (don't worry -- it's backwards-compatible with the old one; old code using the poisson_distribution will not need to be changed). Since poisson_distribution resides in the boost namespace, I didn't know if the policies should be placed there as well, or in the boost/random nested namespace. For now, they are in the boost/random/detail namespace and typedef'ed into the boost namespace.
It's dangerous to define public types in a detail namespace because of ADL.
They are named pd_fast, pd_small, and pd_legacy. However, it occurred to me that perhaps having policy classes in the boost namespace wasn't such a good idea, since these classes are not meant to be instatiated directly. At the very least, they could have private constructors and be friends with the poisson_distribution, but I still don't know if they ought to reside in the main boost namespace.
If anyone knows any rules for this, let me know. As it is there isn't much mention of this situation in the developer faq.
In addition, this header probably needs formal documentation. I am unaware of any stylistic guidelines I should follow.
They should go in namespace boost::random.
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost