On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Darin Adler <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 19, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Darin Adler <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> How about classes that are only used in one cpp file? Should we be > wrapping those in an anonymous namespace? > >> I’d suggest not wrapping them in an anonymous namespace. Debugging tools > work better when classes have unique names. > > > > Has this been a convention we use? > > I’m not sure how to answer that. I have not used anonymous namespaces in > any WebKit code I contributed, and the first case of doing so that I recall > was when Adam Barth used some in the HTML parser work. > Okay. Sounds like it's left to reviewers' and committers' discretions. It'll be still nice to give some guidance on when we should and should not use anonymous namespaces so that I don't have to engage in a debate on every code review. I personally don't like anonymous namespaces because VS.net's class view separates classes within anonymous namespace from the rest: http://goo.gl/2IkzQ (screen shot) But I think we've established that we prefer having unique class/function names over using anonymous namespaces. - Ryosuke
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
