Re: Native Namespace

+1 for Apache.Geode.Client ( .net ) and apache::geode::client( C++ ) Thanks Avinash On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:17 AM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > Anthony, > > You make a good argument. Have fun converting all those namespaces for us > in your free time. :) > >

Re: Native Namespace

Anthony, You make a good argument. Have fun converting all those namespaces for us in your free time. :) Apache.Geode.Client and apache::geode::client it is then... Anyone else want to chime in before we execute on this? -Jake On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 7:39 AM Anthony Baker

Re: Native Namespace

Based on [1] [2] [3] it seems like the .NET convention would be: Apache.Geode.Client For cpp the conventions seem a lot more muddled [4] [5]. Even for Apache projects [6] [7] [8] [9] there’s lots of variation. This variant looks good to me: apache::geode::client but I could

Re: Native Namespace

In my experience, it seems easier to have too many namespaces than it is to have too few. My instinct is to start with geode:: and Geode. and further subdivide when it becomes unwieldy and collisions arise. Sarge > On 16 Jan, 2017, at 21:10, Jacob Barrett wrote: > > An