On Thursday, October 04, 2012 11:03:34 AM Thomas Tanghus wrote: > On Saturday 11 August 2012 14:37 Victor Dubiniuk wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Bart Visscher <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 06:33:06PM +0200, Arthur Schiwon wrote: > > > > The suggestion was actually to use \OCA_appid\ as namespace, what i > > > > did was to support the pattern \OCA\appid\ in the autoloader. > > > > > > > > The first pattern is e.g. used in the app files_version > > > > > > > > namespace OCA_Versions; > > > > class Hooks { .. } > > > > > > > > Having two different approaches is of course bad style and should be > > > > avoided. Frank and I wonder now, what the better and more intuitive > > > > way is: \OCA_appid\ or \OCA\appid\ > > > > > > > > Thoughts, opinions? > > > > > > \OCA\appid\ cleaner and simpler to parse > > > > > > Bart > > > > \OCA\appid\ is actually a nested namespace, but I agree that it is > > cleaner. > > Remind me: What did we end up with on this? I too prefer \OCA\appid\ - > OCA_Appid\Classname is kind of a half-breed imho - and I have used it in my > own app, but now I realize that I might have given wrong advice.
There were no voices against \OCA\appid\ so I consider it's agreed. _______________________________________________ Owncloud mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/owncloud
