Namespaces for new features

[ttuttle]

Hi chromium-dev,

I'm implementing a new feature that's gonna end up somewhere like
chrome/browser/foobar_bazquux/*. To avoid unwieldy class names like
FoobarBazquuxSomethingOrOther, I'd like to put my feature in namespace
foobar_bazquux. Is that acceptable?

Captive portal does something similar ("namespace captive_portal",
although it also prefixes class names with CaptivePortal), so it seems
reasonable to me.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

ttuttle

[Thiago Farina]

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 5:05 PM, ttuttle <ttu...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi chromium-dev,
>
> I'm implementing a new feature that's gonna end up somewhere like
> chrome/browser/foobar_bazquux/*. To avoid unwieldy class names like
> FoobarBazquuxSomethingOrOther, I'd like to put my feature in namespace
> foobar_bazquux. Is that acceptable?
>

No, as far as I know. We discussed this here
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/topic/chromium-dev/pcgYLSJsii8/discussion,
and if I'm not wrong, we decided that code under chrome/ directory
should live in global namespace.


--
Thiago

[Chris Hopman]

I disagree with your interpretation of that previous discussion. It looks like there was consensus that we should not use a chrome:: namespace, but the question of whether or not a feature like foobar_bazquux or history or extensions should have their own namespace was left undecided.

--
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromi...@chromium.org
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
    http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev

[Peter Kasting]

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Chris Hopman <cjho...@chromium.org> wrote:

I disagree with your interpretation of that previous discussion. It looks like there was consensus that we should not use a chrome:: namespace, but the question of whether or not a feature like foobar_bazquux or history or extensions should have their own namespace was left undecided.

That also matches my understanding of the conversation.

For new features, I would suggest avoiding namespaces in any case.  The majority of Chrome features do not use them, and namespace usage is a bit contentious.  Appropriately-named classes are clear and uncontentious, even if they occasionally make code verbose.

PK 

[Paweł Hajdan, Jr.]

Note that maybe the feature should be a browser component instead, see http://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/browser-components

Paweł

--