On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:07:03 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
<[email protected]> said:

> 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?

so it looks like zero people against this... should we do this now - like
soon/early?


-- 
------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    [email protected]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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=278785471&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to