What are the plans with CamelCase includes?

[Kevin Ottens]

On Thursday 02 January 2014 00:31:05 David Faure wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 December 2013 14:48:13 Aleix Pol wrote:
> > > -- Up-to-date:
> > > /d/kde/inst/kde_frameworks/include/KF5/kcoreaddons/kaboutdata.h
> > > -- Up-to-date:
> > > /d/kde/inst/kde_frameworks/include/KF5/KCoreAddons/KAboutData
> > > 
> > > The email thread "RFC Rules for installation of header files" does say
> > > 
> > > >>> If the header files of a framework are not prefixed, then they
> > > >>> should
> > > >>> be installed in include/{lowercaseframework} and convenience headers
> > > >>> should be installed in include/KDE/{CamelCaseFramework}.
> 
> Actually, what's the reason for lowercaseframework there?
> 
> I used that in all the modules I converted (except KIO, I just realized),
> and I'm wondering what the point is.
> 
> Example:
> include/KF5/KIOCore/KFileItem
> include/KF5/KIOCore/kfileitem.h
> works fine with KIOCore in the include path, apps just include <KFileItem>
> or <kfileitem.h>
> 
> If I fix it to
> include/KF5/KIOCore/KFileItem
> include/KF5/kiocore/kfileitem.h  [all lowercase]
> it will of course work too, with both dirs in the include path.
> 
> It's all transparent for the apps either way, since the cmake magic
> encapsulates it for the them.
> 
> I'm just wondering what's the point in using two different dirs for
> kfileitem.h and KFileItem?

This wasn't intended I guess. When the discussion about include files occured 
the consensus was to have everything in a single directory (the camel cased 
one).

Regards.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20140102/0e250f5a/attachment.sig>