From: Boris Burger (Boris.Burger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-11 12:30:16
Hello,
> I was following the first investigations some time ago not very closely,
> but I didn't realise (until lately) that removing the semicolon at
> namespace scope is actually required by the language definition. So I
> think there is no way out: If there is a conflict between text editor and
> language definition, then the text editor must retreat.
[SNIP]
> On the other hand, having erroneous code in a library doesn't seem an
> option to me, even if most compilers ignore it.
Unfortunately there is no clear solution to the issue that would
satisfy everyone. Though I completely agree with your opinion
that the libraries should favor the language definition conformance
over user comfort in text editors.
IOW, broken syntax coloring or source parsing in editor is a less
serious issue compared to the inability to use the library in strict
compiling environment. Note that I understand the problems semicolons
are causing with text editors and code formatters. The editors we
use at work suffer the same. But still, we are more than willing to
sacrifice a little bit of that comfort in favor of being able to
use e.g. ptr_containers without patching its sources with every
new Boost release.
But this is just an user opinion, it all depends on how the responsible
people regard this issue.
Boris