MacArthur, Ian wrote: > This is an interesting idea - though how would it play with the fltk2 > port? > > E.g. the fltk3 code fltk3::Fl::run() would become Fl::run(), which is > "the same" as you would normally write in fltk2 - so is there now an > ambiguity between fltk3 and fltk2, or is this really OK? >
Only if the wrapper is also included at the same time in the code using those statements. If code using FLTK3 needed to mix FLTK versions, then, if it used such a coding style, it could use some other name to stay compatible. (sidenote: it would be the FLTK1 wrapper that would be affected if simultaneously used, Fl being the namespace for some FLTK1 functions, FLTK2 rather having everything within namespace fltk) _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
