Am 21.02.2024 um 20:28 schrieb Thiago Macieira:
On Wednesday, 21 February 2024 10:56:49 PST Edward Welbourne via Development
wrote:
(Incidentally, the ways I can think of to say "has no name" tend to
suffer from some degree of precedent as "has a name but it has not been
disclosed" - the anonymous author of a pamphlet, the unnamed person who
reported a problem. I'm currently unable to think of such a precedent
for "nameless", but I suspect that's only that I can't currently think
of it. Then again, if a namespace with no name actually does have a
secret name, I guess that just matches the linguistic baggage.)
It's an unnamed namespace, not anonymous namespace.
There's such a thing as anonymous union, though.
You are obviously referring to the wording in the actual C++ standard.
Still I'd really avoid rebuking Edward or anyone else for using the term
"anonymous namespace". It's simply the term established by Clang and GCC:
https://godbolt.org/z/xTe8zfhfs
Guess we either have to live with this inconsistency, well or convince
the developers of CCC and Clang to correct their code.
Ciao
Mathias
--
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
