WG21 paper on templated namespaces

[kwikius]

Hi all,

I have been searching through the list of papers at:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/

I seem to remember a proposal regarding templated namespaces e.g:

template <typename T>
namespace X{

}

Unfortunately I cant find it. Does anyone know the name/number of the
paper I'm thinking of or have I just invented it?

regards
Andy Little

[kwikius]

Victor Bazarov wrote:

kwikius wrote:

[..]
A namespace is reopenable which is a useful feature it has over a
struct.

You can always *derive* from a struct, can't you?

BTW another important property of a namespace is that you cant't
instantiate it. IOW used as a container a struct has inconvenient
connotations requiring extra work to prevent instantions (e.g deriving
from boost::noncopya ble which causes its own problems) . IOW its a pain
in th a** using a struct this way.

regards
Andy Little

[kwikius]

kwikius wrote:

Hi Kaz,

FWIW I posted your post separately to comp.std.c++ (rather than cross
posting)

At least I thought I had. If nothing appears on comp.std.c++ in the
next day or so, I'll try again.

regards
Andy Little

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* kwikius:

kwikius wrote:

Hi Kaz,

FWIW I posted your post separately to comp.std.c++ (rather than cross
posting)

At least I thought I had. If nothing appears on comp.std.c++ in the
next day or so, I'll try again.

The comp.std.c++ robo-moderator software is currently acting up.
Sometimes it acts like a black hole. Sometimes it forwards the message
to two moderators, one of which will approve it, and one of which will
reject it on the grounds that it's very, almost suspiciously similar to
the one approved. And so on. So it's probably no fault of yours if
that message seemingly disappears: just try again.

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

[kwikius]

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

* kwikius:

kwikius wrote:

Hi Kaz,

FWIW I posted your post separately to comp.std.c++ (rather than cross
posting)

At least I thought I had. If nothing appears on comp.std.c++ in the
next day or so, I'll try again.

The comp.std.c++ robo-moderator software is currently acting up.
Sometimes it acts like a black hole. Sometimes it forwards the message
to two moderators, one of which will approve it, and one of which will
reject it on the grounds that it's very, almost suspiciously similar to
the one approved. And so on. So it's probably no fault of yours if
that message seemingly disappears: just try again.

Ok. Its there!

regards
Andy Little

[kwikius]

Hi Frederick,

Frederick Gotham wrote:

I like this! We could then have code like the following:

[snip details]

Its probably worth re-posting your post to comp.std.c++ FWIW, in the
thread with the same title as this one.

Sorry if I'm stating the blindingly obvious!

regards
Andy Little

[Kaz Kylheku]

kwikius wrote:

Hi Frederick,

Frederick Gotham wrote:

I like this! We could then have code like the following:

[snip details]

Its probably worth re-posting your post to comp.std.c++ FWIW, in the
thread with the same title as this one.

There is no point in doing that. You will invariably be told:

``Wonderful! Now all you have to do is produce a working reference
implementation
in at least one compiler, get some users and spend some time gaining
experience
with the use of that feature.''

So it ultimately doesn't matter where in Usenet you want to discuss it,
as long as it's not too wildly off topic wherever that is.

:)