Actually, I would like Qt Addons to live in a namespace, esp. for new ones. The namespace name ought the be the same as the module's name. This is really there to avoid name clashes with other parts of Qt. With a namespace, you have all the freedom you want on how to name methods inside. developers using the module can simply use a using declaration, and then won't have to worry about long names.
Cheers, Lars On 2/25/13 12:03 PM, "Joerg Bornemann" <joerg.bornem...@digia.com> wrote: >On 25/02/2013 09:35, Sorvig Morten wrote: > >> - Stand-alone function namespace: >> * Qt::toPlatformType (³Qt::toWindowsHBITMAP². >>³Qt::toMacCGImageRef²) >> -OR- >> * QPlatform::toType(³QWindows::toHBITMAP², >>"QMac::toCGImageRef") > >I vote for the latter naming scheme. We should not simulate namespaces >by cluttering the function names. >Looking at the Windows example, it might be wise to call the platform >namespaces QtPlatform, not QPlatform to make the namespace QtWindows and >the class QWindow easier distinguishable. > > >BR, > >Joerg > >_______________________________________________ >Development mailing list >Development@qt-project.org >http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development