boost::utility::string_view should name a type

[vinniefalco]

if you include <boost/utility/string_view.hpp> then this line should work:

using string_view = boost::utility::string_view;

[Lastique]

Why?

[glenfe]

We don't use the utility namespace

[vinniefalco]

Why?

Because I can't be bothered to remember whether or not each of N Boost libraries "uses its namespace" or not. I include a header, I expect to find the symbol in its corresponding namespace. I thought the convention was that Boost.X has a namespace called X and its symbols go there. If the types are worthy they are also lifted into the boost namespace. Having random exceptions makes things harder to use.

[glenfe]

It's true for all new Boost libraries, but even (for example), shared_ptr is boost::shared_ptr not boost::smart_ptr::shared_ptr.

[vinniefalco]

So all new boost libraries put their symbols in boost::? That's news to me. I'll change Beast in time for 1.78 then.

[glenfe]

No, requiring a library namespace under boost is true for all new libraries. But Utility, Smart_Ptr etc. and older libraries are not subject to that rule.

[vinniefalco]

Well, that's my point - I have to remember which libraries follow the rule and which don't. I'd rather not.

[Lastique]

Libraries that focus on a given topic do use a dedicated namespace, and are supposed to in the future. Boost.Utility, Boost.Detail and to a degree Boost.Core are not such libraries - those are just a collection of random unrelated tools. Historically, those were introduced in namespace boost. We might consider moving some components to dedicated namespaces where it makes sense (e.g. Boost.SmartPtr). But having boost::utility in particular, doesn't make much sense, IMHO.

That said, it may make sense to extract string_view and string_ref to a separate library and use a namespace in that library.