29 Dec
2004
29 Dec
'04
6:46 a.m.
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
Okay, if there are no objections, this is what I'll do.
This didn't come out quite right -- I know that Daryle has objected.
I guess I mean: given the fact that the namespace-directory convention has already been widely violated, if there are no further objections I'll keep the library in the iostreams directory but use the io namespace.
I didn't see the whole thread, but we ought to try to avoid violating the convention any more than it has been. As Boost grows, this becomes more important. What's wrong with a namespace boost::iostreams? You can always introduce an alias for backward compatibility. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com