I am starting out with C++ and almost everywhere I see there is these 2 sentences at the top.#include <iostream>using namespace std;As I understand namespaces are something to keep names separate and have same identifiers in different namespaces. So isn't including std in the beginning undoing all the hard work of creating namespaces? Isn't it better to have something like std::cout when I need a certain function from a particular namespace?Would including the namespace in the particular function that uses it a good tradeoff between less typing (std::cout vs. cout everywhere) and avoiding the name conflicts(abc in foo and abc in bar avoided using foo::abc and bar::abc)? Something likeint function_using_abc_namespace(int a){    using namespace abc;    //Rest of the function}I wanted to know because avoiding name conflicts is necessary but avoiding more typing is also important. If this isn't good way to get a middle ground then what are the alternatives?
What are the good practices for including namespaces in C++ that avoid more typing?
c++;namespace
Updated answer based on updated questionIt is okay to using namespace std in *.cpp files.It is okay to using namespace std inside function bodies.Reason: In both cases, they aren't contagious. Contagiousness is the only reason why they shouldn't be used at the global namespace level in header files.Single-file C++ projects (having just one *.cpp file, no headers, e.g. in programming puzzles and competitive programming) can use them liberally.Original answerThe only hard rule with using namespace std; in C++ is this:Do not put this in a header file, if this header file needs to be included by multiple source files (*.cpp).Reason: it is contagious.Other than that, I suggest taking a pragmatic approach to it:Allow importing namespaces as long as it does not cause a compiler warning / ambiguity / conflict.This brings up the question of: what is the true benefit of having namespaces? The simple answer is disambiguation. But disambiguation for who's benefit?Disambiguation for programmers?This is a relatively minor benefit, because most programmers are already accustomed to object-oriented programming, and the naming of objects is already sufficient for telling about the category and the purpose of that object.However, only human can make sense from the name of objects - computers can't. (See the next point about automated tools.)The human mind is excellent at resolving ambiguity by taking context and domain knowledge into account.Disambiguation for automated tools, such as compilers, automatic comment-to-documentation generators (Javadoc, Doxygen, etc), and automatic refactoring tools? I would argue that this is a more important reason for using namespaces.By putting objects into namespaces, automated tools can present groups of objects as interrelated.This helps hierarchical organization of class documentations, enforcement of package visibility rules, and many other neat things.Therefore, as long as it does not cause a conflict, feel free to import namespaces.