Re: [boost] [type_traits][general] Best practice for inline namespaces?

On 1/18/15 8:45 AM, Rogerio dos Santos wrote:

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 6:16 AM, John Maddock wrote:

...

I was thinking of adding inline namespace support (ie lib versioning) to type_traits, but what's the best practice for naming the inline namespace? I was thinking of going with some mangled version of BOOST_VERSION which would effectively change the namespace with each release. That feels like it's probably right to me: old versions of any traits would then be archived in boost::tt105600:: or whatever version the change happened. Comments?

The Google style ( http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.html) is against inline namespace usage, but I see that in case of multiple versioning this might me interesting to use.

Roger

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

The google style guide forbids the use of Boost in general with a very few exceptions. Among those is: "The part of Polygon that deals with Voronoi diagram construction and doesn't depend on the rest of Polygon" In view of that, I think it makes little sense for the Boost developers to adhere to the google guidelines, at least until they condescend to admit the Pentagon as well.