Boost C++ Libraries: Ticket #4137: boost::program_options::value_semantic missing 's' at the end

status changed; resolution set

Vladimir Prus — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:38:42 GMT

status new → closed
resolution → wontfix

Thanks for the report. It is missing 's' indeed ('semantic' is adjective, 'semantics' is noun). However, I suspect changing it at this point will break source and binary compatibility, and therefore we're stuck with this naming forever.

status changed; resolution deleted

anonymous — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 06:22:17 GMT

status closed → reopened
resolution wontfix

Replying to vladimir_prus:

Thanks for the report. It is missing 's' indeed ('semantic' is adjective, 'semantics' is noun). However, I suspect changing it at this point will break source and binary compatibility, and therefore we're stuck with this naming forever.

You could provide the necessary typedefs

Vladimir Prus — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 14:26:12 GMT

That would still break ABI, I believe. Am I wrong?

anonymous — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:45:38 GMT

Replying to vladimir_prus:

That would still break ABI, I believe. Am I wrong?

typedef value_semantic value_semantics;

Note the order.

I'm not sure that Boost.ProgramOptions could/should provide any ABI compatibility given that Boost as a whole doesn't provide such.

anonymous — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:48:17 GMT

Usage of the 'value semantic' phrase should be fixed in the docs regardless of the class name.

milestone changed

Marshall Clow — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 20:25:03 GMT

milestone Boost 1.43.0 → To Be Determined

Is there a specific example in the docs that you think should be changed? I've just looked through them and it seems that "value_semantic" (without the 's') is used everywhere except in one case, where it is referring to one or more objects, and so the 's' on the end seems appropriate.

status changed; resolution set

Marshall Clow — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 16:34:26 GMT

status reopened → closed
resolution → wontfix

Since no one has responded, I am closing this ticket. If anyone has specific bugs in the docs, please re-open the ticket with pointers.