On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 2:07 AM, Carsten Haitzler <[email protected]> wrote: > so now eo api and efl look the same... work the same. why keep eo api as eo_ ? > why not just move it into efl_ space :) i see no reason to keep it separate. > it's just confusing. is what iw ant in eo_ or in efl_ ? > > either that or we move all efl_* space to eo_* - either way .. why keep both? > why make people have to figure out where something comes from before they can > use it? > > now that comes to eina. we can't sensibly do eina_* to efl_* i think without > having major issues. but what do people think? maybe it should be less > mysteriously named like eina_and instead be et_ or edt_ (efl types, efl data > types)... unless we can sensibly actually make it efl_... > > i am not talking about what .so is belongs in - just the api namespacing. > > comments?
For Eina, wouldn't that mean double the symbols for legacy? > -- > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- > The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [email protected] Regards, -- Felipe Magno de Almeida ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Transform Data into Opportunity. Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library. Click to learn more. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785231&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
