Re: Moving C++ bindings in gmpxx.h into a namespace

2013-07-01 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Sam Varshavchik mr...@courier-mta.com wrote: Is there any interest in moving all the C++ bindings into their own namespace, say gnu::mp? We need a cost/benefit analysis. What do we gain compared to the massive amount of existing code that is sure to break? (I

Re: Moving C++ bindings in gmpxx.h into a namespace

2013-07-01 Thread Sam Varshavchik
Marc Glisse writes: On Sat, 29 Jun 2013, Sam Varshavchik wrote: Is there any interest in moving all the C++ bindings into their own namespace, say gnu::mp? Vaguely. Preferably at the same time as some other ABI-breaking changes. This is popular with many C++ dev libraries, like boost,

Re: Moving C++ bindings in gmpxx.h into a namespace

2013-07-01 Thread Sam Varshavchik
Niels Möller writes: Sam Varshavchik mr...@courier-mta.com writes: Compatibility with existing code is trivial. What about binary compatibility? I imagine namespaces are involved in the symbol name mangling in some way? (I'm no C++ guy, so I don't have any strong opinion on whether or not