David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Fernando Cacciola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> I'm trying to say that I think it's the wrong patch. The right patch
> >> would put the swap specialization into _STL::.
> >>
> > It actually sufixes
>
> I assume you mean "suffices".
>
:-) yes
> > to put any 'std' extension in a nested namespace (say, stdx); then
> > injecting the names in 'std'.
>
> That's unfortunately illegal. You're not allowed to add names to
> std,
Oh Right...
I guess adding a namespace counts as adding a name.
>and anyway I don't see how it could help if you want to
> specialize something in std. Am I missing something?
>
If the specialization is injected into 'std' via
a using directive, as in
namespace std { using namespace stdx ; }
the problem goes away (the primary swap<> is now found).
The idea is to mimic the way the primary swap<> is defined
to avoid the conflict in as much a configuration-independent way
as possible.
STLPort (as shiped with BCB6) has various configuration flags
that affect the place were std names are effectively placed.
The following excrept from "stl\_config.h" shows the possibilities:
# if defined (_STLP_USE_OWN_NAMESPACE)
# ifdef _STLP_DEBUG
# define _STLP_STD _STLD
# else
# define _STLP_STD _STL
# endif
# else
# ifdef _STLP_DEBUG
# define _STLP_STD stdD
# else
# define _STLP_STD std
# endif
# endif
Names are declared/defined within _STLP_STD, where the actual value of
_STLP_STD depends on _STLP_USE_OWN_NAMESPACE and _STLP_DEBUG.
With the default configuration (the only one that really works with BCB6),
_STLP_STD=_STL
ALl these names are brought into 'std' by a using directive,
as shown by the following excrept from "stl/_epilog.h"
# if defined (_STLP_REDEFINE_STD) || ! defined (_STLP_USE_NAMESPACES)
// We redefine "std" to "stlport", so that user code may use std:: transparently
# undef std
# if defined(__cplusplus)
# ifndef _STLP_CONFIG_H
# include <stl/_config>
# endif
namespace _STLP_STD { }
namespace std {
using namespace _STLP_STD;
}
# endif // __cplusplus
# endif
The conflict sown by Alisdair arises from the fact that
"std" names are actually in a nested namespace and injected
into namespace std.
According to 3.4.3.2/2, if 'swap' is found _directly_
in namespace std, then the nested namespace _STLP_STD is not
looked up. This is why the mere presence of a function
named 'swap' hides the primary swap<>.
The problem ocurrs even if the 'swap' in 'std' is not
a specialization but any function with that name.
The idea of my workaround was to put the specialization
at the same 'level': in a nested namespace and not in 'std' directly.
As I realize now it is illegal to do that.
Anyway, the alternative workaround is to put
the specializations right in _STLP_STD (as you suggested)
(but not in _STL as that is just one of the possible actual namespaces,
depending on the configuration).
Similarly, qualified names should use _STLP_STD
(and not _STL for the same reasons as above).
BTW, I have a question:
According to BCB, the primary swap is hidden when some swap is
declared directly in std even for ADL.
That is, not even this works:
using std::swap; swap(x,y);
is this conformant?
I can't decipher the Standard on this matter.
Fernando Cacciola
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
