Vladimir.Batov@[snip] wrote:
[snip]
Bo Persson also expressed a concern siting it'll make it "very hard to propose the utilities for inclusion in a future language standard". May be. May be not. When things of that magnitude happen (which seem quite remote at present)
Using boost::string makes inclusion in std even more distant, while choosing another name is trivial.
components get moved from a namespace to a namespace (several times) anyway. Like some stuff from the "boost" namespace moving to the "tr1" namespace just ultimately to be moved to the "std" namespace.
In most cases names does not change when moved to std::. The name 'boost::string' would suggest a string class for me, not a namespace. boost::strings, boost::text, boost::from_string/boost::to_string seems much better to me.
[snip]