Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote:
Sorry answering to myself.
On 5/15/07, Felipe Magno de Almeida <felipe.m.almeida@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
Which is desirable for a library developer.
Sure I meant *un*desirable.
Best regards,
I agree with Ulrich that the problem is not specific to Boost but the solutions that we use impact the library in question. What I guess I am saying is that if Boost were to adopt user- definable versioned namespaces, it would help a lot. Here is what we have been doing for other open source libraries: example: user-config.h --------------------------------- #define SITE_SPECIFIC_NAMESPACE_BEGIN namespace v1_33_1 { #define SITE_SPECIFIC_NAMESPACE_END } --------------------------------- example: boost_foo.h --------------------------------- #include "user-config.h" namespace boost { SITE_SPECIFIC_NAMESPACE_BEGIN // do you regular stuff here SITE_SPECIFIC_NAMESPACE_END } --------------------------------- For people who do not care, SITE_SPECIFIC_NAMESPACE is simply nothing and it reverts to your unversioned boost. Otherwise, if we do care and put our versioning in it, we can now distinguish different interfaces and plus have the compiler warn us of such mixing. Thoughts? concerns? Any other alternatives?