Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 08:30:28 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, src-committers@freebsd.org, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Pietro Cerutti <gahr@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r268491 - head/usr.bin/users Message-ID: <A736379B-00CC-4D76-9937-7A666587C829@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201407111726.14347.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201407101215.s6ACF3v1055260@svn.freebsd.org> <201407111003.57785.jhb@freebsd.org> <12328E44-58A8-4334-A7F4-C7F29C9F6D0E@FreeBSD.org> <201407111726.14347.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11 Jul 2014, at 22:26, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> For things that live in the base system, there's not much danger of = boost conflicts. 'using namespace std' is mostly a problem when it's in = headers (especially=20 > library headers), because it can break large amounts of code. In a = tiny utility, it's probably the right thing to do. >=20 > The original question was about a general style rule for C++ code in = FreeBSD. > I suppose it would be fine to permit it in small utilities and only in = .cc > files but not otherwise? I would say that it's completely fine as long as: - It's in an implementation file and - The utility has not dependencies other than the standard library The first ensures that namespace pollution is localised. The latter = limits you to cases where there is no chance of there being any = conflicts (if you're defining a symbol in a program that has the same = name as an STL one then you should probably be referring to it by its = fully qualified name anyway or the code will be unreadable). David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A736379B-00CC-4D76-9937-7A666587C829>