Peter Dimov wrote:
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
The occurence of boost::io::put in the above example has to be qualified, since otherwise it will refer to the member function being defined.
What I have to say has nothing to do with namespaces or directory placement, but...
Given that in the documentation you speak of user-defined overloads of boost::io::read et al, it might be worthwhile to point out that two-phase lookup will not see these user overloads. If you want to have an overload customization point in a template, you have to use an unqualified call. And choose the identifiers wisely. :-)
Yikes! I knew there were limitations to customization by overloading, but I didn't think I had stumbled over them yet. I objviously can't use unqualified calls here, or change the names. I arleady implement read, et al. by simulated tag-dispatch: template<typename T> inline std::streamsize read(T& t, BOOST_IOSTREAMS_CHAR_TYPE(T)* s, std::streamsize n) { typedef typename detail::dispatch< T, istream_tag, streambuf_tag, input >::type tag; return detail::read_impl<tag>::read(detail::unwrap(t), s, n); } I'd really hate to make read_impl and dispatch public, or to add yet another level of indirection. :( So maybe my best option is to excise those innocent-sounding passages you refer to, and require users to write wrappers if they want to integrate existing components into the framework. Thanks for pointing this out! Jonathan