Re: Problem with compilator DEV C++

osmium wrote:
> <jcoffin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:MPG.225401fa9eb637d7989c32@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In article <64t180F2dcf9oU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, r124c4u102@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> says...
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>>> That is NOT a using directive but a perfectly (to me) acceptable
using
>>>> declaration.
>>> Granted, it's a declaration and not a directive.
>>>
>>> Now let's see if I have this straight.  Let's say, just for the sake
of
>>> argument, that stealing is a bad thing.  But it is "perfectly
acceptable"
>>> if
>>> you only steal *one* thing at a time?  Is that the rule?.
>> A poor analogy. Likening it to stealing, implies that either a using
>> directive or a using declaration is fundamentally wrong.
>>
>> That's not the case -- they're included in the language because there
>> are times that (albeit open to some disagreement) it's perfectly
>> reasonable to put them to use.
> 
> Yes, my point is that it is fundamentally wrong to use either one *in a 
> header file*. Putting
> a using declaration in a header file means that anyone who uses that
file
> must inspect it to see what is there and then *remember* each one that
was
> used.  In a pretty trivial program I would use at least 20 of the names
in
> std::.  I do not think I should impose such a burden (remembering my
> personal list) on my fellow programmers just so I can avoid typing a few
> keystrokes.   The advantage of the using thingies that I see, is
avoiding 
> pollution of the source code with noise words. The typing labor can be 
> minimized by the editor or other macro key aids.


I cannot for the life of me follow your argument. I always need to know 
the names I include when I #include a header file and it makes no 
difference how those names get declared. The problem with a using 
directive is exactly that I do not know what names will be included.