Hi, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes@acm.org> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 11:30 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [date-time][threads] Integrating C++0x clocks, time points, and durations into Boost?
Jeff Garland wrote:
... As I said above we have some boost specific concerns that we may need to address in our implementation. I think I'll want to put the new stuff in a new namespace -- do we have anything for 0x yet? Maybe boost::cpp0x or boost::cpp0x::date_time?
One thing that came out of the LWG's discussion of N2615 was a strong (10 for, 0 against) preference for putting the clock/duration/time_point stuff in a sub-namespace. While the LWG reserves the right to make future sub-namespace decisions on a case-by-case basis, there was strong support for sub-namespaces for specific problem domains, particularly those with a lot of very common names inside. Perhaps that can guide your choices.
Hum... I think we should follow the Boost TR1 practice, which provides the actual declarations and definitions in a boost:: sub-namespace, and then provides a <boost/tr1/whatever> header that hoists the names into namespace std::tr1 with usings.
This is valid for an existing boost library that is later accepted for the TR1, but not for a library that is accepted for the TR1 and need an implementation in boost.
So in this case, we would provide a <boost/cpp0x/chrono> header with names in namespace std::chrono. The names would be hoisted into that namespace via usings from a boost namespace such as your suggested boost::cpp0x::date_time or boost::date_time::cpp0x or boost::date_time::chrono or whatever.
How does that sound?
I don't understand. boost::tr1is already used for all the TR1 additions of c++0x? So why not place all these files directly on the boost/tr1 directory with namespace std::tr1 or a more specific one? Am I missed some thing? Vicente