I very much doubt there is any chance to getting the C API namings changed.
In glibmm/gtkmm however there is the chance to improve on that. There is always the lingering question, at times more prominent than others, whether it is the "right" thing to do, i.e. to deviate from the C API, but I have personally always maintained, maybe not openly expressed, that the relation between the C API and g*mm should never go as far as to make the C++ API seem awkward; I'm sure it's not a big problem to even beginner programmers to adjust to the namespace change in the case of going from the C to the C++ API and staying there. I do however see it as a bit problematic in case you need to switch between C++ and C documentation in case something isn't wrapped yet or not documented thoroughly enough, which would be, as I see it, the only thing that speaks against my own proposition, but then again it's all already in a Gio::* namespace so in effect it wouldn't make a difference and I think using Gio::DBus:: is the better alternative. On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Jacky Alcine <[email protected]>wrote: > That makes sense. For the sake of cleanliness; is it possible to perhaps > rename the C object notations as well? I mean, the type GDBus is a bit > misleading; as it's part of Gio. > > On 02/15/2011 04:53 AM, Milosz Derezynski wrote: > > The "namespacing" in the C layer is very confusing. First, GDBus is part > of > > GIO, but types are named GDBus*, not GioDBus*. > > > > Then there are the "methods", which are named g_dbus_*, which would much > > rather suggest being a part of Glib itself, rather than GIO, but so is > > everything else in GIO (GFile*, g_file_*). > > > > It's not easy for me to come to an inner consensus here but since there > is > > already a Gio namespace in glibmm and even a Gio::DBus one, I'd prefer to > > see these classes move into Gio::DBus::*, but definitely not into > GDBus::*. > > > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Jacky Alcine <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> Sounds like a very good idea, promotes OOP-style coding. > >> > >> On 02/15/2011 04:19 AM, Murray Cumming wrote: > >>> We now have several Gio::DBus* classes: > >>> http://library.gnome.org/devel/glibmm/unstable/group__DBus.html > >>> > >>> I'm thinking of moving these into a Gio::DBus namespace, so we'd have > >>> Gio::DBus::Connection, instead of Gio::DBusConnection. > >>> > >>> Or maybe GDBus::Connection? > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> *Jacky Alcine* Blog <http://jdevelopthis.blogspot.com> | Wintermute > Blog > >> <http://wintermuteai.wordpress.com> | Ubuntu Wiki > >> <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/jackyalcine> | Launchpad > >> <https://launchpad.net/~jackyalcine> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> gtkmm-list mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > gtkmm-list mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list > > -- > *Jacky Alcine* Blog <http://jdevelopthis.blogspot.com> | Wintermute Blog > <http://wintermuteai.wordpress.com> | Ubuntu Wiki > <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/jackyalcine> | Launchpad > <https://launchpad.net/~jackyalcine> > > _______________________________________________ > gtkmm-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list > > -- Please note that according to the German law on data retention, information on every electronic information exchange with me is retained for a period of six months. [Bitte beachten Sie, dass dem Gesetz zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung zufolge jeder elektronische Kontakt mit mir sechs Monate lang gespeichert wird.]
_______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
