KDE 4 namespaces

[Charles Samuels]

On Monday 09 May 2005 9:25, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> Am Montag 09 Mai 2005 02:42 schrieb Cornelius Schumacher:
> > I'm against changing our namespaces.
>
> I'm with Cornelius here. Introducing namespaces to KDE seems to be
> more political correctness than technically feasible.
>
> As beginner you would not just have to figure you want KConfig, no
> you would need to figure what name space is that in, what clashes
> a use "KDE::Core" introduces, what class names you will have to prefix
> to make it compile again, etc. etc. For little to no gain.

Other annoying things about namespaces include:
	- If you don't use "using namespace", there's a hell of a lot of typing
	- if you do use "using namespace" using a class like "ListView" is pretty 
ambiguous.
	- if one of the c-based header files you use has a #define ListView (wild 
example), then you'll be in for some fun trying to work around it
	- if you use "using namespace" A person looking at a class like "ListView" 
will have no idea where the class comes from unless em is familiar with KDE 
coding.

And I think that Thiago's different class-nestings are rather arbitrary.  Why 
does it matter if a class is part of Core or not?

-Charles
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20050509/b5588a4f/attachment.sig>