Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.mixmin.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Methods for understanding complex, real world, C++ code?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 11:00:26 +0900
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <87aa29dcjp.fsf@catnip.gol.com>
References: <jm1l4g$a6e$1@dont-email.me> <slrnjol896.1ls.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> <4f8b5ae2$0$8504$c3e8da3$cc4fe22d@news.astraweb.com> <87mx6cfq4c.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <4f8b76ad$0$1701$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com> <87hawjkxjr.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <5f4jr.9360$qT5.7995@news.usenetserver.com> <9v48hfFoqtU2@mid.individual.net> <tWfjr.12581$515.5875@news.usenetserver.com> <873982dtos.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <Aekjr.2$Fh4.1@news.usenetserver.com> <87ty0hddwn.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <9Uojr.3$Fh4.1@news.usenetserver.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Trace: individual.net 5m1hKTLIUteYkqI4RLYCKwPzew6PaZyD7F1a6X+aGLEtUoVhf4
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Hnx9Dc9pbHJB6AUyBpKl1/3qYfc= sha1:fmcB3k6qEzPveENYpYUwgqQk7/I=
System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:15443

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>Er, but anyway, my question was:  Why does not using the STL make
>>namespaces any less useful?
>
> Because everything in our code was part of one of our classes.  Either static
> data/function members or regular members.   All of which are impliciltly or
> explicitly qualified by the class name.  There was no need for namespaces.

Er, OK, but then of course your classes themselves are in the global
namespace.

You might consider that OK, but many would consider it a good use of
namespaces to collect all those classes in a library / module /
whatever namespace (maybe with some sub-namespaces as well).

... and of course, either way, there seems to be no connection with
whether one uses STL / std:: or not...

-miles

-- 
=====
(^o^;
(()))
*This is the cute octopus virus, please copy it into your sig so it can spread.