Re: MVC in C++
From: Bjorn Reese (breese_at_see.signature)
Date: 02/27/05
- Next message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: creaping coupling......"
- Previous message: frebe: "Re: OO programming - illumination?"
- In reply to: Phlip: "Re: MVC in C++"
- Next in thread: Robert C. Martin: "Re: MVC in C++"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 14:05:32 +0100
Phlip wrote:
> Sutter and Alexandrescu say 'using namespace X' is "not evil", but they
> don't go as far as supplying 'std' for X.
They are discussing "using namespace" in general, and provide no
exception or special treatment for std.
Let me quote the relevant passage:
"In all headers, and in all implementation files before the last
#include, always explicitly namespace-qualify all names. In
implementation files after all #includes, you can and should
write namespace using declarations and directives liberally.
This is the right way to reconcile code brevity with modularity."
> Leave that up to your team to decide.
Please make up your mind. First "nobody should use 'using namespace
std'", and now the team can decide. I can agree with the latter, but
not the former.
-- mail1dotstofanetdotdk
- Next message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: creaping coupling......"
- Previous message: frebe: "Re: OO programming - illumination?"
- In reply to: Phlip: "Re: MVC in C++"
- Next in thread: Robert C. Martin: "Re: MVC in C++"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|