On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 07:19:04PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 03:22:45PM -0700, Monty Taylor wrote: > > I think we should introduce a new style or policy on the use of using > > namespace. Currently, the only policy we have on this is that using > > namespace must never be used in headers, and the implementation should > > always do using namespace std; > > > > As we put more and more things into the drizzled namespace, we're going > > to want to use them. So, I propose that we never use using namespace > > deeper than: > > > > using namespace drizzled; > > I quite like using drizzled:: explicitly... but then again, I am weird.
So, I'm doing some namespace cleanup around the Protocol and Scheduler modules, and have been doing: using namespace drizzled; plugin::Protocol ...; Which I think we just agreed is preferred over: drizzled::plugin::Protocol ...; I'm seeing drizzled::message::Table (probably from Stewart ;) already in the source, but would like to be consistent. We should pick one or the other and normalize, and I'd prefer the shorter name approach with 'using' (sorry Stewart). Thoughts? -Eric _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
