On Wednesday, 12 December 2012, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> > I'd like to add some IDL syntax sugar, so that instead of doing this:
> >
> > module com { module sun { module star { module formula {
> > }; }; }; };
> >
> > we can do this:
> >
> > module com::sun::star::formula {
>
> I'd like to add some IDL syntax sugar, so that instead of doing this:
>
> module com { module sun { module star { module formula {
> }; }; }; };
>
> we can do this:
>
> module com::sun::star::formula {
> };
>
Sounds lovely to me - and you intend to keep supporting t
On 12/12/2012 10:58 AM, Noel Grandin wrote:
I'd like to add some IDL syntax sugar, so that instead of doing this:
module com { module sun { module star { module formula {
}; }; }; };
we can do this:
module com::sun::star::formula {
};
(Or even drop the module {
Hi
I'd like to add some IDL syntax sugar, so that instead of doing this:
module com { module sun { module star { module formula {
}; }; }; };
we can do this:
module com::sun::star::formula {
};
Which is consistent with how namespaces are used elsewhere, and much
mu
