Joel de Guzman wrote:
* Un-reviewed implementation details of libraries have been placed in boost/detail if they need to be used by other libraries and a subdirectory of boost/<libraryname>/ otherwise. Their documented public components are placed in boost/detail and namespace boost::detail.
I think the current situation is a little problematic. If there in boos/detail, presumable its because they might be useful accross more than one library. However, There is no place for documentation of these things. So there is no guarenteed interface. And of course no separate tests. No guarentee that the interface won't change - after all its an implementation detail. So it can change without warning an break other libraries. So, one has a lot of reservations about depending upon these modules. On the other hand, they have proved very useful so for the sake of expediency they're going to get used - leading to surprise breakages. So I think those things that have been going to boost/detail should just go into boost / utility. Approval for this would be part of the review process for the library which needed them. I realise some might find this bothersome, but its much better the the current situation. Robert Ramey