[RFC] Solid and use of namespaces

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Sunday 21 May 2006 00:50, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> On Sunday 21 May 2006 01:27, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Since my current idea is to put those more specialized classes in their
> > own subnamespaces
>
> Sounds quite unnecessary and overdesigned, IMHO. It will also make
> refactoring much more complicated.

not really. 

i like namespaces because it communicates the natural grouping of classes. in 
this case i highly doubt one of the Network classes will end up in the Power 
namespaces upon refactoring.

in clear cut cases such as these it encourages the library writer to think 
about which belongs where as opposed to just adding things here and there 
without thought.

i do like kdecore, kdelibs, etc.. without namespaces: they are generic and 
hard to pin down. but solid? phonon? yeah, namespace away, baby.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

Full time KDE developer sponsored by Trolltech (http://www.trolltech.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20060521/2f17f662/attachment.sig>