"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> writes:
| It's true he made some excellent arguments in that thread, but this is a | different argument. ;-) Once you accept as a given that we should be | using an ADL customization point, what should we call it? | | In this message: | http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.user/9837 | | You say: "You're much safer using boost_range_end or range_end if you're | trying to keep it small. I don't see any reason to keep it small, | though: users won't be invoking that function directly." | | And I agree, it should be boost_range_end. We are in agreement. Now we | just need to convince Thorsten. :-)
since we can't use the short version (ity clashes with range_size<TA) then let's go with the boost prefix.
I'll commit shortly
I think you should re-read the boost-users thread and consider all the issues one more time before you do. This is a hard decision to get right. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com