On 30 Jul 2008, at 13:23, Melchior FRANZ wrote:

> Actually, I think that putting std:: at every reference is
> not preferable, as in 99% of the cases we mean std::string,
> and in 100% we mean std::cout, so the prefix is basically
> redundant noise. Do we actually have more than one or two
> cases where a name by itself would look ambiguous? I'm only
> aware of ./src/GUI/AirportList.cxx, where "string" would be
> considered a pu-member without the std.

I think this is a good example of why 'using std::xxx' is potentially  
problematic in headers (especially public library headers, i.e  
Simgear), but fine in sources. So if I'm doing future cleanups, that's  
the approach I'd take - remove 'using' from headers, and add it to  
sources, unless there's only one or two uses, in which case I'll use a  
std:: prefix.

Equally, I'm pretty sure people avoid calling things 'string' or  
'vector' for exactly these reasons, so it's 99.9% unnecessary, as  
Melchior said.

Does this seem reasonable?


This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to