> And the more we use C++, the less convinced I become about the way
> namespaces are used in C++ : There seems to be a widespread habit of
> just sticking a "using namespace xyz" at the head of every file and
> thereby negating almost all the value that namespaces are supposed to
> bring. So what's the point?

Well, don't do that then :)  I don't.

Theoretically all the random namespacing mechanisms at work (FL_, fl_,
Fl_, Fl::, ... any more?) could all be unified.  That said, though I
find it ugly, remembering which flavor of prefix to apply has never
been a big problem for me.  And my impression is that the fltk user
community is just not large enough to support a big source
incompatible change.  Doing the big incompatible change that fixes
everything is risky even with major projects even if everyone can
agree on the fixes.

I'm in favor of cannibalising and phasing out the morbid branches.
I'd be happy to continue living with the current naming scheme though
in favor of gradual changes and cleanups.  Things like more virtual
methods, renaming things that clash, using larger types internally,
and maybe using concrete classes like Point or Rect instead of bunches
of ints.  There's a lot of hackery like the wacky sizes_ layout and
hacks to keep e.g. scrollbars at a certain position in children_ that
could be made more regular at a very minor cost to performance (if
any).  Some stuff like support for the 8 bit colormap could probably
be dropped.  And UTF8 of course.  Lots of things to do without
worrying about names!

_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to