On 18/11/2016 12:29, Michael Zanetti wrote:
>> + Q_PROPERTY(unity::shell::application::MirSurfaceInterface* surface READ surface NOTIFY surfaceChanged)
> gah I despise this overly excessive namespacing...
Me too! Nested namespaces are an eyesore.
> IMO you could just do "using namespace unity::shell::application;" and be done with this, really... It's not like we'd ever have a conflicting MirSurfaceInterface class somewhere else...
>
Not in a header file though. I think that's bad form. A .cpp file
#including this header would inadvertently get the
unity::shell::application namespace included in their main one.
I'm also scared of doing namespace manipulations in Qt macros. That
might go wrong.
On 18/11/2016 12:29, Michael Zanetti wrote: unity:: shell:: application: :MirSurfaceInte rface* surface READ surface NOTIFY surfaceChanged)
>> + Q_PROPERTY(
> gah I despise this overly excessive namespacing...
Me too! Nested namespaces are an eyesore.
> IMO you could just do "using namespace unity:: shell:: application; " and be done with this, really... It's not like we'd ever have a conflicting MirSurfaceInterface class somewhere else... shell:: application namespace included in their main one.
>
Not in a header file though. I think that's bad form. A .cpp file
#including this header would inadvertently get the
unity::
I'm also scared of doing namespace manipulations in Qt macros. That
might go wrong.