Subject: Re: [Boost-users] implementing a new Range
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-29 12:45:34
AMDG
Mathias Gaunard wrote:
> Steven Watanabe wrote:
>
>> I see. I forgot about the default implementation. The problem
>> with this scheme is that if boost is an associated namespace of
>> T, then boost::begin will be ambiguous with boost::range_detail::begin.
>
> A solution could be to have all ranges in the boost namespace overload
> begin to avoid the ambiguity.
> Overloading that they already do with the current system.
That isn't enough. std::vector<boost::function<void()> > has
boost as an associated namespace e.g..
In Christ,
Steven Watanabe