Signals in the api and the KDevelop:: namespace

[David Nolden]

On Friday 04 May 2007 12:43:40 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 04.05.07 10:55:53, David Nolden wrote:
> The signals in those two files don't mean anything at all, as the
> classes are not derived from QObject. Its just a hint to the developer
> that the implementation will have these signals.

But they seem to match the real signals available. :)

> > Since Qt does only do string-matching when connecting signals, these
> > should be unified. Either always with KDevelop::, or never.
>
> Agreed, so which one do we take? I think including the namespace is a
> bit better to clarify where the argument comes from.

I think too that we should include the namespace. It is a little more typing, 
but it's more logical.

greetings, David