On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:53:26 +0100 Milosz Derezynski <[email protected]> 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_*). [snip]
That is how glib does it, rather than an inconsistency. The glib tarball comes with a number of other modules apart from gio, such as gobject, gthread, gmodule, all with their own pkg-config *.pc set-up files and (apart from gmodule) with their own separate documentation, which also all use the G and g_ namespace prefixes. It is glibmm which has an inconsistent usage, by separating off only gio into a separate namespace (which incidentally is ::Gio, not Glib::Gio), which may be the source of what you find confusing. There seems no particular reason why there should not be GThread, GObject and GModule namespaces in glibmm: the defining feature of course is that gio contains vastly more code than would these others namespaces. However modularising glibmm is in my view a good thing, so Gio::DBus sounds fine to me. But why restrict this to just one subset of gio, namely gdbus? As I say, there is a great deal more namespace modularity which could sensibly be implemented in glib. Chris _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
