Re: glibmm: Creating a DBus namespace?

[Milosz Derezynski <internalerror gmail com>]

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 <jacky alcine thesii org> 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 <jacky alcine thesii org>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
>> gtkmm-list gnome org
>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtkmm-list mailing list
> gtkmm-list gnome org
> 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
gtkmm-list gnome org
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.]