Hi, Glen Fernandes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Antony Polukhin wrote:
I'd prefer to see a single function name, not two:
boost::ignore_unused_variables(v1) ; boost::ignore_unused_variables(v1, v2, v3);
[snip]
boost::utility:: namespace looks reasonable. +1
It feels more like a workaround, than a utility, and so I would have thought that: a. The more natural home is Boost.Config b. The macro approaches were preferable
I also like the idea of not adding new things to Boost.Utility going forward (even if they only depend on Boost.Config).
I wasn't aware that the Utility is such unconvenient library for adding new things. AFAIU Config provides macros which can be used in conditional compilation. AFAIK there are no "tools" there. Or am I wrong? I thought also about Detail but this tool was originally defined in namespace boost, and btw could be used by the users too. And I remember that some time ago there was a discussion about not adding things in the global namespace/directory. Hence Utility because it seemed to be a "library" for orphaned tools. But I have no preference regarding the placement. Regards, Adam