Re: [boost] [Config] Support for switching between std:: and boost:: equivalents.

On 6/6/2015 5:07 AM, Andrey Semashev wrote:

On Friday 05 June 2015 20:14:08 Rob Stewart wrote:

...

On June 5, 2015 10:42:50 AM EDT, Edward Diener wrote:

...

The one header is documented. I have the individual headers to avoid flooding the macro namespaces with lots of macros you are not going to use.

I know you documented the everything header. I was suggesting that you not document or mention the others.

If those headers are public, they have to be documented. FWIW, I'm more interested in the individual headers and not the include-all one.

They are "public" and they are documented. The general header is for convenience and to give uses of the macro system a choice.

...

...

I like to avoid macro name clashes, Having a common prefix, such as CPP, tends to do that.

I understand the concern, but I don't think BOOST_ATOMIC_HEADER, BOOST_ATOMIC_NAMESPACE, BOOST_ATOMIC_IS_STD, etc. would be likely to clash.

Those names are in the namespace of Boost.Atomic by the current conventions. They may not be used now, but can be used later. Please, don't do it.

I agree with you and that is the reason for using a mnemonic for each macro. I am not against changing from BOOST_CPP_ to BOOST_CXX_. I just want to make sure before I do that no other Boost library or set of macros is using BOOST_CXX_.