Jason Hise wrote:
My question may be naive, because I have no idea what the TR is, but what would be the problem with putting all of the TR code in a boost::tr namespace? Are there pieces of the tr already in use?
The latest(?) draft of the C++ Standard Library Technical Report is here: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1745.pdf See the discussion on TR1 => http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg74424.php Some of tr1:: already is in boost:: (and originated there) just with slightly differing details which is the point of the tr1:: versions being worked upon in the CVS. Kevin -- | Kevin Wheatley, Cinesite (Europe) Ltd | Nobody thinks this | | Senior Technology | My employer for certain | | And Network Systems Architect | Not even myself |