From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-01 13:29:16
Steve Cleary wrote:
> ...
>
>typedef's are declarations (and not definitions), and therefore *should*
>work on conforming compilers (too bad we don't have one of those! :).
I didn't mean to raise a false issue. While there were problems with some
past usages, the typedef usage in the code John posted works for at least
the Borland/Metrowerks/Microsoft compilers, and may well work with other
current compilers, too. So maybe we ought to just go with the typedef.
> ...
>
>OTOH, we would still have to keep the "make up your own file namespace
when
>using at namespace scope" thing (which I'm not really fond of).
Agreed. The fewer special cases the user must be aware of, the better.
--Beman