[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Namespaces
- From: "Schleimer, Ben" <bensch128@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:48:44 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=lJcxW88m269QHRK65F3AsaKM0E32E5jrOH84sW7EYz1m1efv37J1ZqJ7F0w0/BCLhRgjwk0Fu3sbfcJdNNgAWg8eM64mg0tNzLupYa34yV9LBiG0dgEi0ItDKp6v/oLAvmhc0buzxt6rwAOS5ulnKF3OdFwIEHjA0u1sGNBWZkU=;
>
> > Look at what Qt does. Qt classes are not encapsulated in any namespace,
> > instead they have the Q prefix, like "QObject".
>
> Qt was first release at a time when namespaces were not well (if at all)
> supported by most C++ compiler.
I have to agree with Cyrille. It would be cleaner to use Eigen::Object instead of prefixing every
class with Ei. Let the application programmer figure out which "using" statements they want to do.
It'll probably be rare to get namespace collisions if eigen is the only matrix library used in an
application. Plus, when Eigen3 comes out, it'll be easier for app programmers to which by changing
the "using EigenX" instead of the prefix.
Cheers
Ben