Den 5. sep. 2013 kl. 14:41 skrev Arne Morten Kvarving: > On 09/05/2013 01:40 PM, Atgeirr Rasmussen wrote: >> 4. For the new modules, some refactoring and documentation work is >> anticipated. For the existing modules, I do not expect much, other than what >> has been done in the course of regular development since last release. There >> is one exception, I think we should move away from nested namespaces. They >> are used only in a few places, and inconsistently at that. Using a directory >> == namespace approach is not very well suited, since it will nest our >> namespaces far deeper than practical, so I think the best is to keep >> everything in namespace Opm. Please make noise if you disagree! There are >> some cases I could consider to be exempt, such as in Units.hpp. > > i know for a fact that i heavily rely on the use of nested namespaces in my > elasticity codes. i don't think you want 'Vector', 'Matrix' and the other > general names i used rolled into the Opm namespace. i question this policy, > and see very little gain and some pain.
Consider this policy shot down, then. Still, I'd like to clean up some things (like the namespace of the ParameterGroup class) and hope to arrive at easier-to-use code for those parts. Atgeirr _______________________________________________ Opm mailing list [email protected] http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm
