Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

More on C++ namespaces

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Boris Zbarsky

unread,
May 14, 2010, 2:52:43 AM5/14/10
to
Another question that came up today... how granular do we really want
our namespaces to be? Do we want separate dom, css, whatever namespaces
for core Gecko code?

For reference, Webkit uses a single WebCore namespace for all its core
dom/css/etc stuff.

-Boris

Smaug

unread,
May 14, 2010, 7:28:53 AM5/14/10
to Boris Zbarsky


I don't see any reason for separate namespaces for dom/css/etc.
Perhaps mozilla::gecko would be enough? I guess
"using mozilla::gecko" might be used quite often in that case.
And for other things mozilla::ipc, mozilla::js, mozilla::necko etc.

(I know we have some mozilla::dom code, but we can change that.)

-Olli

Boris Zbarsky

unread,
May 14, 2010, 10:14:16 AM5/14/10
to
On 5/14/10 7:28 AM, Smaug wrote:
> I don't see any reason for separate namespaces for dom/css/etc.
> Perhaps mozilla::gecko would be enough?

That's what I was thinking, yes.

> I guess "using mozilla::gecko" might be used quite often in that case.

Or not that much, if all the code in content/layout/dom/etc is inside
"namespace gecko {}".

> (I know we have some mozilla::dom code, but we can change that.)

We also have existint mozilla::css code; again we can change that if
desired.

-Boris

L. David Baron

unread,
May 14, 2010, 11:32:34 AM5/14/10
to dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
On Friday 2010-05-14 14:28 +0300, Smaug wrote:
> I don't see any reason for separate namespaces for dom/css/etc.
> Perhaps mozilla::gecko would be enough? I guess
> "using mozilla::gecko" might be used quite often in that case.
> And for other things mozilla::ipc, mozilla::js, mozilla::necko etc.
>
> (I know we have some mozilla::dom code, but we can change that.)

I like the idea, although I'm not sure I'd want to use the name
"gecko" for it.

We'd also need to decide what's in and what's out (which might
partly be determined by what name we choose).

-David

--
L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/

Boris Zbarsky

unread,
May 14, 2010, 12:06:55 PM5/14/10
to
On 5/14/10 11:32 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> I like the idea, although I'm not sure I'd want to use the name
> "gecko" for it.

Other options off the top of my head (none wholly satisfactory or even
partially....): "core", "engine", "renderer", "layout", "webcore" (yes,
yes, I know), "web", "html5" (just for the heck of
mozilla::html::SMILAnimationElement and the like!), "xulrunner".

-Boris

Johnny Stenback

unread,
May 14, 2010, 7:33:05 PM5/14/10
to
I'd vote for "core", which would even line up somewhat well with the
"Core" product we have in Bugzilla.

> _______________________________________________
> dev-platform mailing list
> dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

--
jst

0 new messages