AMDG Sohail Somani wrote:
Since you asked, in my opinion, it is better because it doesn't give the wrong impression that these are *the* boost placeholders and all those other libraries deliberately don't use them to make my life miserable :-)
Though, thinking about it a bit further, if you were to annex the boost::placeholders namespace for bind's placeholders, maybe the other library authors would support what is in that namespace with their libraries. <hand_waving>How hard can it be?</hand_waving> I guess only they know.
I am just asking for some assurance that boost::placeholders would not just be placeholders that work with one library forever. I think that is unfair to the user. There are some really great Boost libraries that help you make your code more concise and it isn't a coincidence that placeholders have a big part to play in these libraries.
Given that boost::bind is also at the top level, I don't see a problem with putting bind's placeholders in boost::placeholders. It should only require a few template specializations to make Lambda and Phoenix recognize them. The only issue is that as Peter mentioned, _1 + _1 won't work. In Christ, Steven Watanabe