On Wednesday 17 June 2015 14:54:03 Daniel Teske wrote: > > Curiously, you didn't list any pro-namespace arguments. > > Actually: > >> We couldn’t make things work in a source compatible way.
not a pro argument > >> * connect statements are hard with namespaces. not a pro argument > >> * metatype registration is problematic with namespaced types not a pro argument > >> * One of our coding guidelines is that you write code once, but read it > >> many times. Code written should be as self explaining as possible. > >> Having generic class names inside an implicit namespace makes this > >> difficult, as information is not fully local anymore not a pro argument > >> * class name prefixing is a widely used and understood scheme by our > >> users. not a pro argument > You think you have countered all of them. But to claim that there were no > pro- namespace arguments is just wrong. Actually: no pro arguments. What's your point? Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <[email protected]> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
